"...the subject which will be of most importance politically is Mass Psychology. ... The populace will not be allowed to know how its convictions were generated. ... As yet there is only one country which has succeeded in creating this politician’s paradise.” - Bertrand Russell, The Impact of Science on Society, 1960.

"...In April 2005, Regnery Publishing, Inc. released another fractured-fairy-tale propaganda piece, promoting pre-emptive war on Iran, this one by Rep. Curt Weldon (R-Pa.).

Sources familiar with the book report that Weldon was snookered by ex-CIA Director and leading neo-con war party operative James Woolsey, and self-proclaimed "universal fascist" Michael Ledeen, into buying fake intelligence, pushed through a former Iranian minister under the Shah, who has more recently been a business partner of discredited Iran-Contra gun dealer Manucher Ghorbanifar.

Representative Weldon concealed the identity of his high-level "source," referring to him only as "Ali." But "Ali" was soon identified as Fereidoun Mahdavi, a former commerce minister, who fled Iran shortly after the 1979 Islamic Revolution, and never looked back...."

"... Weldon said a secret military unit known as "Able Danger" discovered a year before the attacks that ringleader Mohammed Atta and three other future hijackers were in the United States.

Weldon said the unit - created at SOCom under a classified directive in 1999 to take out al-Qaida targets - identified Atta and the others as likely members of the organization.

In fall 2000, the unit recommended SOCom share the information with the FBI, Weldon said in an interview Tuesday.

But lawyers at either the Pentagon or SOCom determined the men were in the country legally, Weldon said. He said he based his information on intelligence sources.

When members of Able Danger made their presentation at command headquarters at MacDill Air Force Base, Weldon said, the legal team "put stickies on the faces of Mohammed Atta on the chart," to reinforce that he was off-limits.

... A former spokesman for the Sept. 11 Commission said that members of its staff were told about the program but that the briefers did not mention Atta's name. The commission report produced last year did not mention Able Danger's findings.

On Tuesday, commission co-chairman Lee Hamilton said that Weldon's information, which the congressman said came from multiple intelligence sources, warrants a review.

He said he hoped the panel could issue a statement on its findings by the end of the week.

"The 9/11 Commission did not learn of any U.S. government knowledge prior to 9/11 of surveillance of Mohammed Atta or of his cell," said Hamilton, a former Democratic congressman from Indiana. "Had we learned of it obviously it would have been a major focus of our investigation."..."

...On Tuesday, commission co-chairman Lee Hamilton said that Weldon's information, which the congressman said came from multiple intelligence sources, warrants a review.

He said he hoped the panel could issue a statement on its findings by the end of the week.

"The 9/11 Commission did not learn of any U.S. government knowledge prior to 9/11 of surveillance of Mohammed Atta or of his cell," said Hamilton, a former Democratic congressman from Indiana. "Had we learned of it obviously it would have been a major focus of our investigation."

At least two congressional committees have begun looking into the episode.

Rep. C.W. Bill Young, chairman of the Defense Appropriations Subcommittee, said he, too, had asked the Pentagon for information about the Able Danger program.

The Indian Shores Republican said that in hindsight, it was easy to say that one thing or another could have disrupted the hijackers.

"There should have been better sharing of information," he said.

Young said that passage of the Patriot Act and appointment of John Negroponte as intelligence czar, which gives one person access to all information generated by the intelligence community, would help resolve future problems.

"The tools weren't as good then as they are today," Young said.

Sounding agitated by what he perceived as a missed opportunity, Weldon made a distinction between the military lawyers and Special Operations Forces, whom he praised. Gen. Pete Schoomaker, the Army chief of staff, was SOCom commander at the time.

The small military unit developed the information using mostly open sources, not classified channels, Weldon said.

Weldon revealed the Able Danger findings in a little-noticed speech on the floor of the House in June. On Monday, Government Security News, a biweekly publication that covers homeland security, published a cover story on the subject, generating another article in the New York Times.

Until now, Atta had not been identified publicly as a threat to the United States before the terrorist attacks on Sept. 11, 2001.

According to Weldon, the military unit identified a terrorist cell in Brooklyn, N.Y., in September 2000.

The individuals identified as members of the cell were Atta, Marwan al-Shehhi, Khalid Almihdhar and Nawaf Alhamzi.

In late 1999 or 2000, the CIA had identified Almihdhar and Alhamzi as terrorist members who might be involved in a terrorist operation.

The duo arrived in Los Angeles in early 2000, but the FBI was not warned about them until spring 2001. No efforts were made to track them until a month before the terrorist attacks.

In the article published by Government Security News, a former defense intelligence official who worked with Able Danger said he alerted SOCom about the unit's findings. The publication said it interviewed the source in Weldon's office...."

NOTE: The following postings (incl. sources) might show, how significant it is to distinguish between "9/11 plotline" and "military operation" of 9/11.

"Able Danger", whether it's based on half fake info or not, proves exactly what all 9/11-patsie researchers, including me, already wrote between 2002 and 2004.

POINT 1: The patsies are leading to the real perpetrators of 9/11!

POINT 2: They all got observed.

There are confirmed names of at least 5 informantsWhether "Able Danger" was yet another observing team, is therefore already irrelevant but has to be investigated.

POINT 3: The final military operation was planned since 1998, many significant developments of that year point strongly on that.

POINT 4: Whether with Clinton's active or passive knowledge (or by deception), the Clinton admin logistically prepared or allow the PRE 9/11 homeland security, created by ANSER and some other important logistical tools and laws.

An anti-paranoia spin on research facts is counterproductive IMO.

POINT 5: Hugh Shelton obviously worked close with the real perpetrators of 9/11, because he was involved in the pre-planning of the invasion into Afghanistan. After he "retired", some months later, he 'fell' from a ladder...

POINT 6: The coincidental significance ("Able Danger") of the tampa connection is also important, coz that's the air base, where they planned the final invasion of Afghanistan (Charles Holland) and flew out some bin laden familiy members....

POINT 7: Atta was already tracked by german intel since 1998. In 1999, german CIA officer Thomas Volz tried to hire Atta's buddy Marmoun Darkanzali as an informant, who was close to some fake-recruiters in europe...

POINT 8: One can be sure, that the so called 4 ringleaders had been underthe control from the real perpetrators of 9/11 and they made sure, that these 4 patsie leaders won't be involved into the actual planning of 9/11 itself.

1) At least one of the official Mohammad Atta's was involved in some CIA cover drug operations at Huffman Aviations. See Daniel Hopsicker at http://www.madcowprod.comWe can conclude, that the real Atta never arrived in Boston on Sep11th.The Florida Atta was under control for the official "plotline" of 9/11.

2)Infos on the 9/11 patsie Informants and observants for the "plotline" http://911review.org/Sept11Wiki/Informants.shtml

In my personal conclusion, based on all research, neither the alleged 19 suspects or their still alive identities had anthing to do with 9/11. I call it "plotline".

The reason to ship them in (inc. via infiltrated Saudi Visa Consulates in Jeddah and elsewhere), was to work on a profile, but some identities never existed and got fabricated by "stand-ins", who sliced some credit cards etc...

Also, some sloppery revealed, that some alleged suspects had been impersonated by multiple stand-ins at different places at same time:

Hani Hanjour, Alomari, Atta ... (for others i have first to revise from my own own older articles :)

"...Felzenberg said an unidentified person working with Weldon came forward Wednesday and described a meeting 10 days before the panel's report was issued last July. During it, a military official urged commission staffers to include a reference to the intelligence on Atta in the final report.

Felzenberg said checks were made and the details of the July 12, 2004, meeting were confirmed. Previous to that, Felzenberg said it was believed commission staffers knew about Able Danger from a meeting with military officials in Afghanistan during which no mention was made of Atta or the other three hijackers..."

Did DoD lawyers blow the chance to nab Atta?http://www.gsnmagazine.com/aug_05/dod_lawyers.html

By Jacob Goodwin

In September 2000, one year before the Al Qaeda attacks of 9/11, a U.S. Army military intelligence program, known as “Able Danger,” identified a terrorist cell based in Brooklyn, NY, one of whose members was 9/11 ringleader Mohammed Atta, and recommended to their military superiors that the FBI be called in to “take out that cell,” according to Rep. Curt Weldon, a longtime Republican congressman from Pennsylvania who is currently vice chairman of both the House Homeland Security and House Armed Services Committees.

The recommendation to bring down that New York City cell -- in which two other Al Qaeda terrorists were also active -- was not pursued during the weeks leading up to the 2000 presidential election, said Weldon. That’s because Mohammed Atta possessed a “green card” at the time and Defense Department lawyers did not want to recommend that the FBI go after someone holding a green card, Weldon told his House colleagues last June 27 during a little-noticed speech, known as a “special order,” which he delivered on the House floor.

Details of the origins and efforts of Able Danger were corroborated in a telephone interview by GSN with a former defense intelligence officer who said he worked closely with that program. That intelligence officer, who spoke to GSN while sitting in Rep. Weldon’s Capitol Hill office, requested anonymity for fear that his current efforts to help re-start a similar intelligence-gathering operation might be hampered if his identity becomes known.

The intelligence officer recalled carrying documents to the offices of Able Danger, which was being run by the Special Operations Command, headquartered in Tampa, FL. The documents included a photo of Mohammed Atta supplied by the U.S. Immigration and Naturalization Service and described Atta’s relationship with Osama bin Laden. The officer was very disappointed when lawyers working for Special Ops decided that anyone holding a green card had to be granted essentially the same legal protections as any U.S. citizen. Thus, the information Able Danger had amassed about the only terrorist cell they had located inside the United States could not be shared with the FBI, the lawyers concluded.

“We were directed to take those 3M yellow stickers and place them over the faces of Atta and the other terrorists and pretend they didn’t exist,” the intelligence officer told GSN.

DoD lawyers may also have been reluctant to suggest a bold action by FBI agents after the bureau’s disastrous 1993 strike against the Branch Davidian religious cult in Waco, TX, said Weldon and the intelligence officer.

“So now, Mr. Speaker,” Weldon said on the House floor last June, “for the first time I can tell our colleagues that one of our agencies not only identified the New York cell of Mohammed Atta and two of the terrorists, but actually made a recommendation to bring the FBI in to take out that cell.”

Weldon has developed a reputation for making bold pronouncements and, occasionally, ruffling the feathers of some of his colleagues. His recent non-fiction book, “Countdown to Terror,” which draws on information from an Iranian expatriate source Weldon has dubbed “Ali,” has drawn criticism from the CIA, others in the intelligence community and some congressional colleagues.

A longtime champion of firefighters and first responders, Weldon has a particular interest in this subject because he has been openly and actively pushing since 1999 for the establishment of an integrated government-wide center that could consolidate, analyze and act upon intelligence gathered by dozens of U.S. agencies, armed services and departments.

Weldon’s proposal was based on the innovative intelligence gathering capabilities he had witnessed at the U.S. Army’s Information Dominance Center, based at Fort Belvoir, VA, (which was formerly known as the Land Information Warfare Assessment Center.) This Army center had employed data mining, profiling and data collaboration techniques before several other intelligence agencies, and was using such cutting edge software tools as Starlight (developed by the Pacific Northwest National Laboratory) and Spires.

For years, the CIA resisted the congressman’s recommendation, Weldon told GSN in a telephone interview on August 1, claiming that his plan to integrate dozens of discrete and classified intelligence streams was both unworkable and unnecessary. Weldon had dubbed his proposed organization the National Operations and Analysis Hub, nicknamed NOAH, because the center was intended “to protect our nation from the flood of threats,” he explained.

Sixteen months after 9/11, such a “data fusion center,” named the Terrorism Threat Integration Center (TTIC) was indeed established by the Bush Administration.

At the urging of the 9/11 Commission, the TTIC has since been restructured and renamed the National Counter Terrorism Center (NCTC).

Weldon is pleased that steps have been taken to unify the nation’s intelligence gathering and analysis capabilities, now headed by a newly established Director of National Intelligence, Joseph Negroponte, but Weldon remains concerned that the “stovepipe” mentalities that plagued the intelligence community in the past continue to inhibit true information sharing between intelligence agencies.

He is also extremely frustrated by the fact that so little official attention seems to have been paid to the intelligence failure related to the Mohammed Atta cell in Brooklyn. Weldon contends that few in the Bush Administration seem interested in investigating that missed opportunity.

“If we had had that [military intelligence] system in 1999 and 2000, which the military had already developed as a prototype, and if we had followed the lead of the military entity that identified the Al Qaeda cell of Mohammed Atta, then perhaps, Mr. Speaker, 9/11 would never have occurred,” Weldon said during his special order remarks.

According to Weldon, staff members of the 9/11 Commission were briefed on the capabilities of the Able Danger intelligence unit within the Special Operations Command, which had been set up by General Pete Schoomaker, who headed Special Ops at the time, on the orders of General Hugh Shelton, then the chairman of the joint chiefs of staff. Staffers at the 9/11 Commission staffers were also told about the specific recommendation to break up the Mohammed Atta cell. However, those commission staff members apparently did not choose to brief the commission’s members on these sensitive matters.

Weldon said he was told specifically by commission members, Tim Roemer, a former Democratic congressman from Indiana; and John Lehman, a former secretary of the Navy; that they had never been briefed on the Able Danger unit within Special Ops or on the unit’s evidence of a terrorist cell in Brooklyn.

The State Department, where Zelikow now works as a counselor to Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice, said he was traveling and unavailable for comment.

“Why did the 9/11 Commission not investigate this entire situation?” asked Weldon on June 27. “Why did the 9/11 Commission not ask the question about the military’s recommendation against the Mohammed Atta cell?”

Weldon is also disappointed with himself for not pushing harder against the intelligence bureaucracy that he saw as resisting his proposal to set up a more integrated intelligence-gathering operation. But he saves some of his greatest ire for the lawyers within the Department of Defense -- he is not sure if they were working within the Special Operations Command or higher up the organizational chart, within the Office of the Secretary of Defense -- for their unwillingness to allow Able Danger to send to the FBI its evidence and its recommendation for immediate action.

“Obviously, if we had taken out that cell, 9/11 would not have occurred and, certainly, taking out those three principal players in that cell would have severely crippled, if not totally stopped, the operation that killed 3,000 people in America,” said Weldon.

Shining a spotlight on this intelligence gaffe has not been easy. Russ Caso, Weldon’s chief of staff, explained to GSN the steps his boss has taken to shed light on the situation.

Weldon spoke with Rep. Pete Hoekstra (R-MI), the chairman of the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence, about conversations he has had with several members of the Able Danger intelligence unit. Weldon has urged Hoekstra to investigate the reasons why Able Danger’s revelations were not shared with the FBI. Hoekstra looked into the matter at the Pentagon, but after several days of fruitless inquiries, was unable to find anyone at the Defense Department who seemed to know anything about Able Danger or would acknowledge the intelligence unit had ever existed, explained Caso in a telephone interview with GSN.

Unwilling to let the matter drop, Weldon arranged for a face-to-face meeting in late July between Hoekstra, himself and the former intelligence officer who had worked with Able Danger, and who outlined his former unit’s evidence and recommendations for Hoekstra.

“Congressman Weldon has met with several people who were working on Able Danger to identify where Al Qaeda was set up around the world,” said Caso. “They made the suggestion that this information be passed to the FBI, and lawyers within the Defense Department -- whether within Special Ops or within OSD, we don’t know -- and the lawyers said, ‘No’.”

A report about some of these events appeared last June 19 in The Times Herald newspaper, of Norristown, PA, which is located in the Philadelphia suburbs that Rep. Weldon represents in Congress.

The Pennsylvania Republican’s freelance spying has once again brought a discredited arms dealer's fabrications to the CIA.

By Laura RozenWeb Exclusive: 06.10.05

Print Friendly | Email Article

Countdown to Terror, Representative Curt Weldon's sensationalistic new book about his personal struggle to combat the Iranian terrorism threat despite the alleged resistance of the CIA, is based entirely on the Pennsylvania Republican's freelance communications with a secret source he code-named "Ali." Much of Weldon's book, which will be released next week by Regnery Publishing, consists of reproduced pages of comically overwrought "intelligence" memos faxed from the Iranian émigré’s Paris location to Weldon’s office between 2003 and 2004.

“Dear Curt,” reads one memo excerpt from “Ali” published by Weldon. “An attack against an atomic plant by a plane, the name mentioned, but not clear it begins with ‘SEA’ … [Seattle?].” Another reads: “Dear Curt: … I confirm again a terrorist attack within the United States is planned before the American elections."

But in an exclusive interview with The American Prospect, Weldon's "Ali" -- who was identified in an April article by me and Jeet Heer as Fereidoun Mahdavi, a frail, elderly former minister of commerce in the shah’s government and a longtime business associate of Iran-Contra arms dealer Manucher Ghorbanifar -- said he was stunned and perplexed to learn that Weldon had used his information to write a book, emphasizing that Weldon never even told him about the book.

Mahdavi also said that the bulk of the information that he had provided to Weldon was originally sourced from none other than Ghorbanifar, the subject of a rare CIA “burn notice” after the agency found him to be a "fabricator" more than two decades ago during the Iran-Contra affair.

“Many information that I have given to Weldon is coming from Ghorbanifar,” said Mahdavi, who was reached in Paris by telephone on June 6. “Because Ghorbanifar used me, in fact, to pass that stuff because I know he has problems in Washington.”

The former minister continued: “I am well-known in Tehran. How can I call Tehran? But Ghorbanifar is something else. He has all the contacts within Iran. Nobody has so many information and contacts that he has. Now if he is using that information through me to try to buy power indirectly, that is his business. I do it because I have known him for many years.”

Several Iranian exile associates of the pair have told the Prospect that Mahdavi, living in reduced circumstances and caring for his cancer-stricken wife, is in fact financially dependent on Ghorbanifar. They have been involved in various businesses together, from petroleum shipping to arms dealing to (more recently) intelligence peddling, since both washed up in Paris after the Iranian revolution in 1979.

Although Mahdavi expresses understanding of the motives of his old pal and business partner Ghorbanifar, he says he is utterly baffled by Weldon’s decision to use his information as the foundation of a book that the congressman never once mentioned to him.

“I assume that if [Weldon] wanted to publish a book, I assure you I would have heard it,” Mahdavi said initially, in disbelief that Weldon would publish the book without even a phone call. “I am just surprised that you tell me he has a book coming out … .”

Hours later, after receiving a fax with a Congressional Quarterly article about Weldon’s forthcoming book and the amazon.com book description, Mahdavi spoke again in shock and anger.

“Someone is using me for their purposes,” he raged. “How is it possible that something like that book comes out and the people who publish it don’t inform me? Don’t you think that’s strange? What I cannot understand is, if you had not called me and told me there is a book coming out from Weldon, I would have never known about it. You informed me. But this is now, I am sure, there is a fight between all these [U.S. government] organizations, and they are using this issue and using me.”

Among those who agree is the former senior CIA official who met with Mahdavi in response to Weldon’s pressure on the agency to accept the Mahdavi/Ghorbanifar information. The tale of "Ali" suggests that the agency is assiduously seeking to weed out another fabricator like Ghorbanifar (or Iraqi fabulist Ahmad Chalabi) from corrupting U.S. intelligence information on Iran.

Bill Murray, a former CIA station chief in Paris, met with me on June 9 at a northern Virginia shopping mall to talk about Weldon's assault on the agency. Still doing contract work for the CIA since his recent retirement, Murray chose to speak up about the agency’s role in vetting and determining “Ali’s” information to be fabrications -- “émigré babble" -- because Weldon has publicly savaged the CIA in his book. By speaking with reporters, Murray believes he could be risking his contract work, but he’s outraged over what he considers disingenuous attacks by the Pennsylvania congressman.

“Someone’s got to stand up,” Murray said. “I spent 35 years doing this job, mainly in the Middle East. My guideline is well-sourced intelligence to help shape policy. That’s what I did; that’s what my people did. That is my standard, the integrity standard. And this man [Weldon] is attacking our integrity. And I’m not going to sit back and ignore it.”

Indeed, Murray describes very extensive personal efforts to ascertain the quality of Mahdavi's information, including four meetings and many phone conversations, as well as the creation of a secure phone line for Mahdavi to transmit his material to the U.S. government. (As the chief of station at the U.S. Embassy, Murray would normally have sent a junior officer to meet with a potential source like Mahdavi; instead, Murray went himself.)

According to Murray, Mahdavi only sent two faxes on the secure line -- one with all the information he had already sent Weldon and Michael Ledeen, the neoconservative scholar and longtime Ghorbanifar champion, and another with a plan to overthrow the mullahs in Tehran. Murray says he firmly told Mahdavi that he was not willing to receive such plans, because overthrowing the Iranian government is not U.S. policy.

He also said that during those meetings and calls, several things became clear rather quickly about Weldon's informant.

“Mahdavi works for Ghorbanifar,” said Murray, noting that the agency still forbids its employees from dealing with the colorful, fast-talking arms dealer. “The two are inseparable. Ghorbanifar put Mahdavi out to meet with Weldon … . Ghorbanifar decided to have a cutout.” When Mahdavi consistently refused to provide any information to verify the credibility of his sources or their increasingly outlandish allegations, Murray determined that the information was a mix of fabrications, babble, and useless political analysis.

“I don’t feed sensationalistic garbage to American political leaders,” Murray said, “without some reason to believe that it is well-sourced or true. . . My generation is not risk-averse. We are just averse to feeding garbage into the system.”

“This man [Mahdavi] never said a single thing that you could look back later and he said it would happen and it did happen,” the retired station chief continued. “He refused to give me any information that would indicate he actually had access to people in Iran who had access to that information.”

Murray also indicated that Mahdavi repeatedly requested U.S. government payment of approximately $150,000 so that he could pay his debts in Iran and help institute political changes there. Despite Weldon's constant urgings, the CIA was unwilling to provide any such payment.

Moreover, said Murray, Weldon himself violated U.S. government protocol by failing to report his encounters with Mahdavi in France to the U.S. ambassador when asked whether he planned any meetings there while being hosted by the embassy in April 2004. According to Murray, Weldon denied he had planned any meetings -- and then proceeded to meet with both Mahdavi and Ghorbanifar, the subject of the CIA burn notice, at the Sofitel hotel around the corner from the U.S. Embassy.

Murray added that Weldon now plans to have his new book translated into Farsi and smuggled into Iran, as well as having it broadcast into Iran on the Los Angeles-based Iranian diaspora radio stations.

This curious behavior raises questions about Weldon’s motives. Is he a naïf getting taken in by two geopolitical hucksters? Or is his treatment of Mahdavi a kind of political opportunism all its own?

Apparently Weldon has treated his allies as poorly as his new enemies at the CIA. In March, his spokesman told the Prospect that Weldon’s book was being co-written by a former CIA analyst and longtime Weldon congressional staffer named Peter Vincent Pry. Indeed, Pry is the named recipient of several of the Mahdavi memos published in Weldon’s book, and Mahdavi acknowledges meeting with Pry and Weldon.

But when copies of Weldon’s book appeared this week, Pry’s name was nowhere to be found in the author credits. Meanwhile another book on Iran and terrorism by Kenneth Timmerman, a right-leaning journalist long interested in Mideast affairs, is due to be published by Crown next week as Countdown to Crisis, a title almost identical to that of Weldon’s book. Timmerman told the Prospect that Regnery changed Weldon’s title to imitate Timmerman’s after publicity materials about the Timmerman book appeared on Crown’s Web site.

So much for squabbling among right-wing authors.

What’s far more important, says Murray, is that Weldon’s freelance 007 crusade to be his own spymaster has ultimately done a disservice to the American people and to national security.

“Most of us [CIA officers] have been consumed with preventing real terrorist threats to the U.S. for the past four years,” he said with a fierce squint. “And virtually everything Ghorbanifar and his people come up with diverts us. I have hard-working people working for me, and they don’t have time for this bullshit.”

Laura Rozen reports on national-security and foreign-policy issues from Washington, D.C., for The American Prospect, The Nation, and other publications. Her first article on Ghorbanifar and Mahdavi, “The Front,” co-authored with Jeet Heer, appeared in the Prospect’s April edition.

Sources from "Tracking all hijackers"by ewing2001http://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/HL0302/S00218.htm28 February 2003

1)Mohammad Atta("observed" since at least 1997, confirmed 1999, by BND, CIA, Mossad and various european police and intelligence)

"...Mohammad Atta's telephone calls between him and another suspect, Imad Eddin Barakat Yarbas, were being intercepted. Yarbas is otherwise known as 'Abu Dahdah', a Palestinian with Spanish citizenship and connections with Bin Laden associates.

Yarbas' phone was tapped since 1997. As later came out, not only the Spanish police, but also Spanish intelligence okayed the bugs..."

2)Marwan Al-Shehhi(observed together with Mohammad Atta since at least 1998/99, CIA, FBI)

3)Ziad Jarrah(observed together with Mohammad Atta)

The CIA still claims, that Jarrah (pilot of the jetliner that crashed in Pennsylvania) was not on a terrorist watch list. However, according to motel records, a man by that name used a credit card to pay for a late August 2001 stay at the Pin Del motel in Laurel, Md., where Nawaq Alhamzi stayed in September.

Alhamzi was on the CIA watch list.http://www.wbz.com/now/story/0,1597,311329-364,00.shtml

Therefore it can be assumed, that Jarrah was observed as well.Another important detail: Ziad Jarrah's uncle Nazem Jarrah, worked for the East Germany intelligence service, in addition to being an agent for the Libyan services.

4)Hani Hanjour

Hani Hanjour had been on a watch list since 1996. Due to information from a former muhjahadeen fighter of the CIA and former informant of the FBI, Aukai Collins, Hanjour had been observed by the FBI since 1996.

5-8)Waleed M. Alshehri Saeed AlghamdiAhmed Alghamdi Ahmed Alhaznawi

Tracked via military institutions, i.e.Embry-Riddle Aeronautical University in Daytona BeachSan Antonio Base at the Alpha Tango Air schoolsNaval Air Station in Pensacola, Florida

9)Salem Alhamzi

Salem Alhamzi was being observed by the CIA and FBI, together with Khalid Al-Midhar, at this time. This became one of the most well publicized stories, but it is still blamed on just "incompetence".http://www.cnn.com/2001/US/09/16/inv.investigation.terrorism/

10)Khalid Al-Midhar

It has already been confirmed that Khalid Al-Midhar was observed by the CIA and FBI, and lived in Jersey City, New Jersey.http://www.cnn.com/2001/US/09/16/inv.investigation.terrorism

One of the few multiple personalities, most obvious impostered more than once.One of his identities possibly tracked at Newark Airport and Saudi Flight Ops.

13)Majed Moqed

Moqued "stayed" in Caldwell, New Jersey.Possibly impersonated or did not exiist, but profiled by someone of McGuire Air Force Base (305 Air Mobility Wing) in Fort Lee

14)Satam Al Suqami

Lowest Profile. However, it was HIS passport (not Attas!) which was "found" in front of the former CIA office at WTC 7, Vesey street, which appears to me, that his identity was scripted from some neocon-cell inside the CIA as well.

15)Wail Alshehri

His visa mentioned "wasantwn" (washington) as his alleged employer. Possibly scripted identity by a stand-in

16 -19)Fayez Ahmed Hamza Alghamdi Mohald Alshehri Ahmed Alnami

4 more scripted indentities, 2 of them at least already confirmed as being still alive.

Most obviously tracked by FBI, then later also by DIAA bizarre screw-up. 2 alleged hijackers (maybe scripted for another hijacked plane) got arrested and jailed for 1 year.http://globalfreepress.com/article.pl?sid=03/12/21/2043235

"...In an exclusive report and interview with Village Voice from October 2002, other fishy details of former "evidence" were revealed:"The hair dye was due to vanity (Azmath sported close-cropped, graying hair in court), the box cutters were tools of the men's newsstand trade" (Penn Station, New Jersey, sold in August 2001), and "the cash was for moving to Texas to find better-paying jobs." (to open a fruit stand) ...

...In the same article, Azmath announced to sue the US Government "for alleged physical and mental torture". The lawsuit never took place..."

The theory about 19 alleged "hijackers" and more is a myth.

The scripted "plotline" has nothing to do with the military operation of 9/11, which has been misinterpreted by a majority of 9/11 researchers.

At least six alleged 9/11 hijackers, including all of those who officially boarded Flight 77, lived in Laurel, Maryland, close to NSA. They reportedly include Hani Hanjour, Majed Moqed, Khalid Almihdhar, Nawaf Alhazmi, and Salem Alhazmi.

The NSA confirmed, that they had been aware of a “Khalid,” “Nawaf Alhazmi,” and his brother “Salem” having communications with this safe house in 1999 and earlier in 1998. In summer 2000 there are additional communications to the safe house from “Khalid” and “Salem”.

Actually it was also the NSA, who passed information to the CIA about the famous meeting in Malaysia.http://election.cbsnews.com/stories/2001/01/24/60II/main266857.shtml

Like CIA and FBI, NSA also is using "negligence" as a cover for a controlled observation of a combination of pseudo-patsies, stand-ins, "phantoms" and other scripted personalities.

In at least one german paper, DIE ZEIT, it was confirmed, that also MOSSAD supported the so called "observations", apparently also with the help of an alleged art students group, as reported by FOX TV:

Aug. 23, 2001. "...The Israeli intelligence service Mossad presents to its American counterpart a list of names of terrorists who are living in the United States and seem to be planning to carry out an attack in the near future. According to documents obtained by DIE ZEIT, Mossad agents in the United States were following at least four of the 19 hijackers, including Almihdhar..." [ Edited Thu Aug 11 2005, 07:51PM ]

...Yesterday, Thomas H. Kean and Lee H. Hamilton, former Chair and Vice Chair of the 9/11 panel released the following statement, in which they claimed, that Philip Zelikow, the former executive director of the 9/11 Commission, was aware of "Able Danger" since October 21, 2003. The statement also reinforces the official story of 9/11.

However, please also note, that the former 9/11 panelists try to downplay the existence of ABLE DANGER. This comes as a surprise, because they're usually playing the bigger negligence card.

The Commission did not mention ABLE DANGER in its report. The name and character of this classified operation had not, at that time, been publicly disclosed. The operation itself did not turn out to be historically significant

The statement was forwarded to some mailing lists of 9/11 family members.I couldn't find it at http://www.9-11pdp.org/press/index.htm yet.

August 12, 2005Kean-Hamilton Statement on ABLE DANGER

"...On October 21, 2003, Philip Zelikow, the executive director of the 9/11 Commission, two senior Commission staff members, and a representative of the executive branch, met at Bagram Base, Afghanistan, with three individuals doing intelligence work for the Department of Defense. One of the men, in recounting information about al Qaeda's activities in Afghanistan before 9/11, referred to a DOD program known as ABLE DANGER. He said this program was now closed, but urged Commission staff to get the files on this program and review them, as he thought the Commission would find information about al Qaeda and Bin Ladin that had been developed before the 9/11 attack. He also complained that Congress, particularly the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence (HPSCI), had effectively ended a human intelligence network he considered valuable.

As with their other meetings, Commission staff promptly prepared a memorandum for the record. That memorandum, prepared at the time, does not record any mention of Mohamed Atta or any of the other future hijackers, or any suggestion that their identities were known to anyone at DOD before 9/11. Nor do any of the three Commission staffers who participated in the interview, or the executive branch lawyer, recall hearing any such allegation.

While still in Afghanistan, Dr. Zelikow called back to the Commission headquarters in Washington and requested that staff immediately draft a document request seeking information from DOD on ABLE DANGER. The staff had also heard about ABLE DANGER in another context, related to broader military planning involving possible operations against al Qaeda before 9/11.

In November 2003, shortly after the staff delegation had returned to the United States, two document requests related to ABLE DANGER were finalized and sent to DOD. One, sent on November 6, asked, among other things, for any planning order or analogous documents about military operations related to al Qaeda and Afghanistan issued from the beginning of 1998 to September 20, 2001, and any reports, memoranda, or briefings by or for either the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff or the Commanding General of the U.S. Special Operations Command in connection with such planning, specifically including material related to ABLE DANGER. The other, sent on November 25, treated ABLE DANGER as a possible intelligence program and asked for all documents and files associated with DIA's program 'ABLE DANGERâ'? from the beginning of 1998 through September 20, 2001.

In February 2004, DOD provided documents responding to these requests. Some were turned over to the Commission and remain in Commission files. Others were available for staff review in a DOD reading room. Commission staff reviewed the documents. Four former staff members have again, this week, reviewed those documents turned over to the Commission, which are held in the Commission's archived files. Staff who reviewed the documents held in the DOD reading room made notes summarizing each of them. Those notes are also in the Commission archives and have also been reviewed this week.

The records discuss a set of plans, beginning in 1999, for ABLE DANGER, which involved expanding knowledge about the al Qaeda network. Some documents include diagrams of terrorist networks. None of the documents turned over to the Commission mention Mohamed Atta or any of the other future hijackers. Nor do any of the staff notes on documents reviewed in the DOD reading room indicate that Mohamed Atta or any of the other future hijackers were mentioned in any of those documents.

A senior staff member also made verbal inquiries to the HPSCI and CIA staff for any information regarding the ABLE DANGER operation. Neither organization produced any documents about the operation, or displayed any knowledge of it.

In 2004, Congressman Curt Weldon (R-PA) and his staff contacted the Commission to call the Commission's attention to the Congressman's critique of the U.S. intelligence community. No mention was made in these conversations of a claim that Mohamed Atta or any of the other future hijackers had been identified by DOD employees before 9/11.

In early July 2004, the Commission's point of contact at DOD called the Commission's attention to the existence of a U.S. Navy officer employed at DOD who was seeking to be interviewed by Commission staff in connection with a data mining project on which he had worked. The DOD point of contact indicated that the prospective witness was claiming that the project had linked Atta to an al Qaeda cell located in New York in the 1999-2000 time frame. Shortly after receiving this information, the Commission staff's front office assigned two staff members with knowledge of the 9/11 plot and the ABLE DANGER operation to interview the witness at one of the Commission's Washington, D.C. offices.

On July 12, 2004, as the drafting and editing process for the Report was coming to an end (the Report was released on July 22, and editing continued to occur through July 17), a senior staff member, Dieter Snell, accompanied by another staff member, met with the officer at one of the Commission's Washington, D.C. offices. A representative of the DOD also attended the interview.

According to the memorandum for the record on this meeting, prepared the next day by Mr. Snell, the officer said that ABLE DANGER included work on link analysis, ? mapping links among various people involved in terrorist networks. According to this record, the officer recalled seeing the name and photo of Mohamed Atta on an 'analyst notebook chart' assembled by another officer (who he said had retired and was now working as a DOD contractor).

The officer being interviewed said he saw this material only briefly, that the relevant material dated from February through April 2000, and that it showed Mohamed Atta to be a member of an al Qaeda cell located in Brooklyn. The officer complained that this information and information about other alleged members of a Brooklyn cell had been soon afterward deleted from the document ("redacted") because DOD lawyers were concerned about the propriety of DOD intelligence efforts that might be focused inside the United States. The officer referred to these as posse comitatus restrictions. Believing the law was being wrongly interpreted, he said he had complained about these restrictions up his chain of command in the U.S. Special Operations Command, to no avail.

The officer then described the remainder of his work on link analysis efforts, until he was eventually transferred to other work. The officer complained about how these methods were being used by the Defense Intelligence Agency, and mentioned other concerns about U.S. officials and foreign governments.

At the time of the officer's interview, the Commission knew that, according to travel and immigration records, Atta first obtained a U.S. visa on May 18, 2000, and first arrived in the United States (at Newark) on June 3, 2000. Atta joined up with Marwan al-Shehhi. They spent little time in the New York area, traveling later in June to Oklahoma and then to Florida, where they were enrolled in flight school by early July.

The interviewee had no documentary evidence and said he had only seen the document briefly some years earlier. He could not describe what information had led to this supposed Atta identification. Nor could the interviewee recall, when questioned, any details about how he thought a link to Atta could have been made by this DOD program in 2000 or any time before 9/11. The Department of Defense documents had mentioned nothing about Atta, nor had anyone come forward between September 2001 and July 2004 with any similar information. Weighing this with the information about Atta's actual activities, the negligible information available about Atta to other U.S. government agencies and the German government before 9/11, and the interviewer's assessment of the interviewer's knowledge and credibility, the Commission staff concluded that the officer's account was not sufficiently reliable to warrant revision of the report or further investigation.

We have seen press accounts alleging that a DOD link analysis had tied Atta and Marwan al-Shehhi (who had arrived in the U.S. shortly before Atta on May 29) to two other future hijackers, Hazmi al-Mihdhar and Nawaf al-Hazmi, in 1999-2000. No such claim was made to the Commission by any witness. Moreover, all evidence that was available to the Commission indicates that Hazmi and Mihdhar were never on the East coast until 2001 and that these two pairs of future hijackers had no direct contact with each other until June 2001.

The Commission did not mention ABLE DANGER in its report. The name and character of this classified operation had not, at that time, been publicly disclosed. The operation itself did not turn out to be historically significant, set against the larger context of U.S. policy and intelligence efforts that involved Bin Ladin and al Qaeda. The Reportâ's description of military planning against al Qaeda prior to 9/11 encompassed this and other military plans. The information we received about this program also contributed to the Commission's depiction of intelligence efforts against al Qaeda before 9/11.[ Edited Sat Aug 13 2005, 05:07PM ]

Mohamed Atta was protected from official scrutiny as part of an officially-protected cocaine and heroin trafficking network with ties to top political figures, including Republican officials Jeb Bush and Katherine Harris, and it was this fact—and not the “terrible lapses” of “weak on terror” Clinton Administration officials cited by Republican Congressman Curt Weldon—which shielded him from being apprehended before the 9.11 attack.

Weldon alleges that Pentagon lawyers rejected the military intelligence unit’s recommendation to apprehend Atta because he was in the country legally, and therefore information on him could not be shared with law enforcement.

But the “terrible lapses” cited by Weldon do not stem from the nonsensical assertion that Atta had a green card (he did not) which rendered him immune from military investigation but were the result of an officially-protected heroin trafficking operation being conducted on planes like those of Wally Hilliard, whose Lear jet flew "milk runs" down and back to Venezuela every week for 39 weeks in a row before finally running afoul of local DEA agents not been clued-in on the 'joke.'

Full article and video:http://www.madcowprod.com/08172005.html

Thanks to Mr. Hopsicker for providing more evidence that shows Atta was a drug trafficker and NOT a suicide pilot. Gotta love it when people provide information that contradicts their very own assertation.

See this thread:http://team8plus.org/forum_viewtopic.php?7.114.10

Hopsicker knows it was Mohammed Atta piloting Flight 11 because Atta was a psychopath (breakfornews interview that I have). With proof like that who needs evidence?Dan, you Da Man. o+o)

Second Officer Says 9/11 Leader Was Named Before Attackshttp://www.nytimes.com/2005/08/23/politics/23intel.html

By PHILIP SHENONPublished: August 23, 2005

WASHINGTON, Aug. 22 - An active-duty Navy captain has become the second military officer to come forward publicly to say that a secret intelligence program tagged the ringleader of the Sept. 11 attacks as a possible terrorist more than a year before the attacks.

The officer, Scott J. Phillpott, said in a statement on Monday that he could not discuss details of the military program, which was called Able Danger, but confirmed that its analysts had identified the Sept. 11 ringleader, Mohamed Atta, by name by early 2000. "My story is consistent," said Captain Phillpott, who managed the program for the Pentagon's Special Operations Command. "Atta was identified by Able Danger by January-February of 2000."..."

A fountainhead of new clues to the Sept. 11 attacks and the far-flung international network that spawned them is becoming public, apparently fed by heavily partisan cries of a massive intelligence failure on the part of the Bush administration. Democrats on Capitol Hill, led by Senate Majority Leader Tom Daschle (D-S.D.), are demanding creation of a special investigation to determine possible Bush-administration misfeasance.http://tinyurl.com/c72qr

Caption under the photo in the above article.Democrats Daschle and Gephardt complained about Bush but not Clinton. Rep. Curt Weldon (R-Pa.) revealed U.S. Special Forces identified the al-Qaeda network and had a plan to wipe out the cells two years ago. But DoD brass shied from implementing the project. Weldon calls for investigating all early warnings.

...here are some highlights from a new Village Voice/James Ridgeway article, which of course also doesn't include anything new for the plotline, however only Chicago Tribune and many german mainstream papers wrote about this so far, years ago.

The article ignores, that Atta's 'contact' Marmoun Darkanzali was almost hired as an informant by CIA officer Thomas Volz.

http://www.villagevoice.com/news/0534,mondo1,67096,6.htmlErrors of Commissionby James Ridgeway, with Natalie WittlinAugust 23rd, 2005

"...By 1998, Atta was living in a Hamburg apartment (later found to be an Al Qaeda cell) and under surveillance by German intelligence. The Germans were passing along what they knew to the CIA. There are suggestions that Atta may have been known to U.S. intelligence as far back as 1993 and, according to the German press, the CIA itself had other people in the apartment under surveillance...

...In 2004, the German prosecutor who was in charge of the investigation was scheduled to testify about this Hamburg cell to the 9-11 Commission. But his testimony was unexpectedly canceled. The documents from the investigation are reported to be missing..."[ Edited Thu Aug 25 2005, 03:12PM ]

In today's NY Post we're finally getting some clues, what other reasons than to reinforce the official plotline of 9/11, the story of Able Danger might have:Scripting somehow 9/11 ties with China, to build up a psyOP for the big endgame between Russia, China and US.

Able Danger was a setup and trojan against China from the beginning, distracting from other already confirmed 9/11 patsie-surveillance teams, which had nothing to do with the military operation of 9/11 anyway.

http://www.nypost.com/news/nationalnews/52673.htmAugust 27, 2005

"...The private contractors working for the counter-terrorism unit Able Danger lost their jobs in May 2000. The firings following a series of analyses that Pentagon lawyers feared were dangerously close to violating laws banning the military from spying on Americans, sources said.

The Pentagon canceled its contract with the private firm shortly after the analysts — who were working on identifying al Qaeda operatives — produced a particularly controversial chart on proliferation of sensitive technology to China, the sources said...

...the program also spat out scores of names of other former government officials with legitimate ties to China, as well as prominent American businessmen...

...A Pentagon official said last night that, while the canned contractors worked for Able Danger, the China project was separate from the counter-terrorism assignment.

The Able Danger work was transferred to another Department of Defense contractor — and the program quietly expired later that year when it was completed, the official said.

The China chart was put together by James Smith, who confirmed yesterday that his contract with the military was canceled and he was fired from his company because the military brass became concerned about the focus on U.S. citizens..."

NOTE: Since 9/11, Bill Gertz ("The China Threat"), defense and national security reporter for The Washington Times, tries to tie 9/11 with China and also insisted to claim before the invasion of Iraq, that China may still be helping Iraq upgrade its air defenses.

Gertz has been a guest lecturer at the FBI National Academy in Quantico, Va.; the Central Intelligence Agency; the National Defense University at Fort McNair, Washington, DC; and the Brookings Institution, Washington, DC.

Gertz was also supported by Maj. Gen. John K. Singlaub, former CIA deputy chief in South Korea, by refering to the book "Unrestricted Warfare” by Senior Cols. Qiao Liang and Wang Xiangsui, who apparently wrote in 1999 that an attack by bin Laden on the World Trade Center would be just the type of "unrestricted warfare” that could bring down America.http://www.newsmaxstore.com/nms/showdetl.cfm?DID=6&Product_ID=889&CATID=13&GroupID=58&CFID=238447&CFTOKEN=40146912

1999 was also the same year, when an allegeged accidentally attack on the Chinese Embassy was the official excuse to postpone an assassination attempt on Bin Laden on hold, which should have taken place 2 weeks later. The team was organised by "anonymous" Michael Scheurer, as revealed last year by Vanity Fair:

http://inn.globalfreepress.com/modules/news/article.php?storyid=859

".....the missiles were on place, and everything seemed like a go....But earlier that month, outdated intelligence had caused the United States to mistakenly bomb the Chinese Embassy in Belgrade. It appears that Tenet's assessment that the intelligence had only a 50/50 chance of being accurate helped kill the operation...

The US, Russia or China wants to win the endgame of WW3/4, to rule the world.That's also the reason, why all these nations cover up the truth about 9/11 and use the bogus war on terrorism as a cover, to build up for the final phase.

This week, a wargame by China and Russia revealed, that the timetable against US is set.

End of war game, China lays out spread for RussiaSaturday, August 27, 2005

‘...Through the exercises, the two armed forces... improved their capabilities to meet new challenges and threats and to fight international terrorism, extremism and separatism,’’ Xinhua quoted Chinese Defence Minister Cao Gangchuan as saying..."[ Edited Sat Aug 27 2005, 05:04PM ]

ewing2001 said ...Real Reason for Able Danger-"leaks": Scripting 9/11 ties with China?

In today's NY Post we're finally getting some clues, what other reasons than to reinforce the official plotline of 9/11, the story of Able Danger might have:Scripting somehow 9/11 ties with China, to build up a psyOP for the big endgame between Russia, China and US.

Able Danger was a setup and trojan against China from the beginning, distracting from other already confirmed 9/11 patsie-surveillance teams, which had nothing to do with the military operation of 9/11 anyway.

China has been targeted as having masterminded 9/11 as far back as late 2001, as shown by; Seeds Of Fire: China and the Story Behind the Attack on America by Gordon Thomas. I just happen to have a copy and will be reading through it again this week (it's been 3 years since I first read it in September 2002).

We bring to the attention of our readers this important analysis of Dr. Daniele Ganser of the Zurich Polytechnic published by the International Relations and Security Network (ISN). Dr Ganser's study is based on official US documents and reports. It identifies the role of 9/11 ringleader Mohammed Atta and 3 other hijackers in a secret Pentagon operation. It largely refutes the official US government narrative as presented by the 9/11 Commission.

Four years after the 11 September 2001 attacks on the US, the revelation of a top secret Pentagon operation adds a new twist to a story about which we still know very little.

For the past four years, we have been told by the administration of George Bush and by the official 9/11 Commission report of Chairman Thomas Kean and Executive Director Philip Zelikow that Egyptian extremist Mohammed Atta was the key player in the 11 September 2001 terrorist attacks. Atta, according to the Kean report, was the “tactical leader of the 9/11 plot”. He was the pilot who on that dreadful morning flew the first plane, American Airlines 11, into the North Tower of the World Trade Center in New York. It was Atta’s face, on television and in newspapers across the world, that became the symbol of Islamic terrorism. And it was Atta’s name - not the names of any of the 18 other hijackers allegedly lead by Atta on that day - that was cited by international security researchers. Atta was, as the Kean report stresses, “the tactical commander of the operation in the United States”. According to both the Bush administration and the official 9/11 Commission report, he was working on the orders of Osama Bin Laden who, from remote Afghanistan, controlled the entire operation.

Now, almost exactly four years after 9/11, the facts appear to have been turned upside down. We now learn that Atta was also connected to a top secret operation of the Pentagon’s Special Operations Command (SOCOM) in the US. According to Army reserve Lieutenant-Colonel Anthony Shaffer, a top secret Pentagon project code-named Able Danger had identified Atta and three other 9/11 hijackers as members of an al-Qaida cell more than a year before the attacks.

Able Danger was an 18-month highly classified operation tasked, according to Shaffer, with “developing targeting information for al-Qaida on a global scale”, and used data-mining techniques to look for “patterns, associations, and linkages”. He said he himself had first encountered the names of the four hijackers in mid-2000.

Schaffer himself was fully aware of the delicacy of his revelations. As such, he chose to first speak to US lawmaker and Speaker of the House Dennis Hastert (Republican, Illinois) and House Intelligence Committee Chairman Peter Hoekstra (Republican, Michigan). Schaffer said the two had assured him that exposing the secret “was the right thing to do”. “I was given assurances we would not suffer any adverse consequences for bringing this to the attention of the public,” he said.

The conversations with Hastert and Hoekstra took place before Schaffer anonymously leaked the information to the media on 8 August in the offices of Republican Curt Weldon of Pennsylvania, the vice chairman of the House Armed Services and Homeland Security committees who also supported the exposure of this secret.

Schaffer’s decision to expose Operation Able Danger has given rise to some difficult questions, not the least of which concerns the role of Atta in the top secret operation. It also raises the question of whether anyone in the Pentagon knew in advance what Atta was planning on 9/11.

For now, though, the questions are likely to go unanswered, as the Pentagon claims there is no evidence to support allegations that it had had military intelligence on a 9/11 bomber a year before the attack. The Pentagon has acknowledged the existence of Operation Able Danger, but denies claims that it had identified Atta and three others as early as 1999.

When the “official” facts are turned upside down, we need to go back to the sources and ask: What do we really know about 9/11? Our most important source, Atta himself, is dead. So for now, there is only Schaffer, a 42-year-old native of Kansas City, who worked for the Defense Intelligence Agency (DIA) in Washington at the time of the 9/11 attacks and had insights into the Pentagon’s top secret operation. According to Schaffer, when he informed the FBI and urged them to arrest Atta, the Pentagon’s lawyers intervened and protected Atta for reasons that remain unclear.

The official 9/11 Commission report, which according to its own declaration aimed “to provide the fullest possible account of the events surrounding 9/11” in its 567-page report, fails to mention Operation Able Danger or any other US-based SOCOM operations. On the contrary, in its recommendations as to how the US could be better protected from “terrorists” in the future, the Kean report on page 415 suggests that SOCOM be given larger powers to carry out covert action operations, previously a domain controlled by the CIA.

The Kean commission also recommended better oversight in order “to combat the secrecy and complexity”. Yet, at the same time, we learn from Schaffer that the Kean commission did not provide the full story on 9/11, and specifically on Able Danger. Schaffer, according to his own testimony, had personally informed Zelikow about Able Danger. Yet Zelikow covered up this piece of the puzzle and, to Schaffer’s frustration and disbelief, decided not to include this data on the pretext that it was “not historically relevant”.

If it is true that Zelikow declined to include the information on Able Danger in the Kean report, and if it is true, as Zelikow wrote, that Atta was the “tactical leader of the 9/11 plot”, and if it is furthermore true, as Schaffer publicly explained, that SOCOM protected Atta prior to his deadly attack on the US, which claimed 3,000 lives, then the account as provided by the official 9/11 report is discredited, and we are faced with a sea of lies and cover-ups.

Four years after 9/11, we are presented with facts that are diametrically opposed to the official narrative. While the biggest questions remain unanswered and there is a possibility that they will never be answered, the media would do well by the public to be diligent enough to keep the issue alive and not allow it to be swept under the rug in the face of confusion and complexity.

Dr. Daniele Ganser specializes in secret warfare and is a Senior Researcher at the Center for Security Studies. The opinions contained in this commentary do not necessarily reflect those of the International Relations and Security Network (ISN).

The opinions contained in this commentary do not necessarily reflect those of the ISN.

http://tinyurl.com/ctmrx

More phony 'revelations' to reinforce the 'Evil Terrorist' angle.

19 Hijackers.The 'Cribs' of the DoD and the Financial Centre of America destroyed.

In the game of cribbage, 19 is a dead hand & is worth Nothing.

P.S. Don't know if you caught this ewing2001, but I think that you are a Trailblazer 'fan';

"The cost was greater than anticipated in the tune, I would say, in hundreds of millions," said Lt. Gen. Michael Hayden at a Senate Select Committee on Intelligence hearing last week.

"I would say that we underestimated the costs by, I would say, a couple to several hundred million, in terms of the costs."

According to Hayden, the delays in developing the technology were even "more dramatic" than the costs.

"When we actually encountered doing this, it was just far more difficult than anyone anticipated," Hayden said.

A joint congressional intelligence inquiry into the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks issued last year warned the full implementation of Trailblazer was as much as five years away and "confusion still exists at NSA as to what will actually be provided by that program."

The same inquiry highlighted the reason why something like Trailblazer was so necessary. In June 2002 it was leaked to the media that the NSA had intercepted Arabic messages on Sept. 10, 2001. They were not translated until Sept. 12. They said: "The match begins tomorrow," and "Tomorrow is zero" day.

Trailblazer was conceived in 2000 as a program to organize and manage the vast amounts of data collected every day by the nation's signals intelligence system.

"The more success you have with regard to collection, the more you're swimming in an ocean of data," Hayden explained last week.

"So what Trailblazer was essentially designed to do was to help us deal with masses of information and to turn it into usable thing for American decision makers."

Ironically, Trailblazer was supposed to be a model acquisition program that would transform the way the NSA did business, allowing it to ride the wave of technological innovation in the private sector.

The Trailblazer approach rejected the traditionally expensive government method of defining specific requirements and schedules in favor of allowing industry to be flexible and innovative.

In a 2001 news release NSA lauded its own "heightened level of acquisition discipline" that would be used as it pursued the development of the Trailblazer project.

It was an expensive lesson in how not to develop sophisticated new technologies, Hayden said.

"We learned within Trailblazer that when we asked industry for something they had or something close to what they already had, they were remarkable in providing us a response, an outcome. When we asked them for something that no one had yet invented, they weren't any better at inventing it than we were doing it ourselves," Hayden said.

The better approach is "far more cooperative," with the government customer closely involved in monitoring the progress of the program.

"There's a middle ground between doing it ourselves and just exporting the problem," he said.

In 2002 NSA was heading in the opposite direction. Hayden told a congressional committee he was increasingly relying on the private sector for technology development.

"In terms of 'buy vs. make' (the term Congress has used), we spent about a third of our SIGINT development money this year making things ourselves. Next year the number will be 17 percent," he said.

Trailblazer's diffic ulties also taught the NSA not to finance attempts to push technology too far.

"We don't profit by trying to do moon shots, by trying to take the great leap forward," he said. "We can do a lot better with incremental improvement, spiral development. And that's where we are now with the program."

An NSA spokeswoman said, true to the spiral development model, some intelligence products developed on the Trailblazer dime were already in use.

"Although we can't discuss specifics, several Trailblazer technologies and products have been used successfully by the intelligence community, as well as by the Department of Defense since 9/11," spokeswoman Mary Payne told United Press International.

"Trailblazer has contributed to this agency's success while the agency has been on a wartime footing."

She said the Trailblazer contract is being restructured to speed the development and deployment of its useful components to NSA projects worldwide. She would not say how much the restructuring would add to Trailblazer's bottom line or whether it would further slow the schedule.

Details of the highly classified Trailblazer program are few. Neither NSA nor the Senate Intelligence Committee will reveal exactly how large the cost overrun is, the total budget for the project or when it was supposed to be completed.

However, according to public records Trailblazer may already be costing the taxpayer twice what was originally expected.

NSA awarded several small contracts in 2001 of $10 million and $50 million to government contractors who were hired to help NSA define exactly what Trailblazer would do and how it would do it.

In 2002 a team led by Science SAIC won the first large contract of $280 million for 26 months to build a technology demonstration platform. Hayden indicated to the committee that the program already costs $200 million to $300 million more than that.

CQ reader Ginetta sent me a message earlier today regarding some further Able Danger dots that she had connected. She read Countdown to Crisis by Kenneth Timmerman (a book which I have but have not yet read), a book which focuses on the nascent nuclear threat from Iran. However, after reading about Able Danger here at CQ and the numerous questions it raises about our understanding of al-Qaeda, Ginetta noticed that a passage at the beginning of Chapter 24 might connect Able Danger not just to al-Qaeda but to Iran as well.

In January of this year, Rep. Curt Weldon made a speech to the House of Representatives – a speech which no one took notice of, and which hardly anyone heard, except maybe inveterate C-SPAN watchers – in which he made a number of extraordinary assertions:

"Mr. Speaker, I rise because information has come to my attention over the past several months that is very disturbing. I have learned that, in fact, one of our Federal agencies had, in fact, identified the major New York cell of Mohamed Atta prior to 9/11; and I have learned, Mr. Speaker, that in September of 2000, that Federal agency actually was prepared to bring the FBI in and prepared to work with the FBI to take down the cell that Mohamed Atta was involved in in New York City, along with two of the other terrorists.

"I have also learned, Mr. Speaker, that when that recommendation was discussed within that Federal agency, the lawyers in the administration at that time said, you cannot pursue contact with the FBI against that cell. Mohamed Atta is in the U.S. on a green card, and we are fearful of the fallout from the Waco incident. So we did not allow that Federal agency to proceed.

"Mr. Speaker, what this now means is that prior to September 11, we had employees of the Federal Government in one of our agencies who actually identified the Mohamed Atta cell and made a specific recommendation to act on that cell, but were denied the ability to go forward. Obviously, if we had taken out that cell, 9/11 would not have occurred and, certainly, taking out those three principal players in that cell would have severely crippled, if not totally stopped, the operation that killed 3,000 people in America."

Something about this doesn't quite ring true: none [.pdf] of the hijackers had a green card. Most came in on tourist visas: some had made easily detectable false statements on their visa applications, and might have been legally deported.

And what does Waco have to do with anything? The connection seems tenuous, at best. However, let us pass over that, for the moment, and concentrate on Rep. Weldon's further remarks: he avers that two weeks after the September 11 terrorist attacks on New York and Washington, his "friends" at the Army's Information Dominance Center – "in cooperation with special ops" – brought him a chart that had been created by a secret military unit known as "Able Danger": using "data-mining" techniques, this top secret military intelligence unit had identified Mohammed Atta and three of the hijackers as being part of an al-Qaeda cell in the U.S. This chart, with a visa photo of Mohammed Atta at its center, was created a year before 9/11. Weldon says he took the chart to Stephen Hadley, at the National Security Council, who said he had never seen any such chart, and that he would bring it to "the man" – i.e., the president.

Now it isn't all that surprising that neither Hadley, nor the president, had any inkling of Operation "Able Danger." What's truly startling, however, is that when Weldon talked to those who made the chart, he discovered that not only had they identified the New York cell of Mohammed Atta and two of the other terrorists, but also that a recommendation had been made to take out the cell – and it had been vetoed. By whom – and why? As Weldon put it in his speech:

"That is a question that needs to be answered, Mr. Speaker. I have to ask, Mr. Speaker, with all the good work that the 9/11 Commission did, why is there nothing in their report about able danger? Why is there no mention of the work that able danger did against al-Qaeda? Why is there no mention, Mr. Speaker, of a recommendation in September of 2000 to take out Mohammed Atta's cell which would have detained three of the terrorists who struck us?"

A good question, one that was thoroughly ignored for months, until something called the "Government Security News" picked up the story, and this was followed by a piece in the New York Times by Douglas Jehl, and one this [Thursday] morning, that basically confirmed the outlines of Weldon's story.

A "former defense intelligence official" involved in "Able Danger" was cited to buttress Weldon's assertion, and he claims in the first Times story that, yes, he brought the chart produced by his team to Special Operations Command (SOC) because "We knew these were bad guys, and we wanted to do something about them." At SOC headquarters, in Tampa, Florida, however, they draw a complete blank:

"Col. Samuel Taylor, a spokesman for the military's Special Operations Command, said no one at the command now had any knowledge of the Able Danger program, its mission or its findings. If the program existed, Colonel Taylor said, it was probably a highly classified "special access program" on which only a few military personnel would have been briefed."

According to Al Felzenberg, former spokesman for the Sept. 11 commission, investigators on his staff had been told about the "Able Danger" program, but, he claimed, there was no mention of Atta, which is why the 9/11 Commission report never mentions the subject, even obliquely. However, the former defense intelligence official cited in Jehl's first story begs to differ. He says that Philip Zelikow, executive director of the 9/11 Commission, and three other members of the Commission staff, had been briefed, and that

"He had explicitly mentioned Mr. Atta as a member of a Qaeda cell in the United States. He said the staff encouraged him to call the commission when he returned to Washington at the end of the year. When he did so, the ex-official said, the calls were not returned."

Jehl reported on Wednesday that, according to Felzenberg, who had talked to former staff members of the Commission,

"They all say that they were not told anything about a Brooklyn cell. They were told about the Pentagon operation. They were not told about the Brooklyn cell. They said that if the briefers had mentioned anything that startling, it would have gotten their attention."

The next day, however, the former Commission staffers were singing a different tune. In their follow-up story, Jehl and Philip Shenon report the Commission staff was indeed briefed in a meeting held on July 12, 2004, at which Atta's name figured prominently, and that this has been acknowledged by the same officials who were denying everything 24 hours earlier. The briefing had been discounted, these officials now claim, because the information offered didn't "mesh" with what they thought they already knew, and, besides, the 9/11 Commission report was all ready to go to the printer. The addition of a piece of information that would have substantially altered the content was apparently not considered important enough to tell the printer to wait.

The main thrust of the 9/11 Commission's findings was that there was a "lack of actionable intelligence": the terrorist attacks on the Pentagon and the World Trade Center represented a gigantic "intelligence failure," which blocked attempts to take out Bin Laden in Afghanistan. But the point is that what was needed was actionable intelligence in America, not Afghanistan. In the aftermath, many lamented the fact that, if only some version of the PATRIOT Act had been in place prior to 9/11, the attacks might have been prevented. As I wrote when the Commission first began its work, this"Sounds superficially plausible, except when one considers that there was plenty of actionable intelligence about the 9/11 plotters: there were warnings galore, as we are beginning to discover, not only from foreign intelligence agencies but from our own agents and analysts.

"Yes, but these warnings were 'nonspecific': that's the standard official excuse. Except it isn't true: the ringleader of the 9/11 plot, Mohammed Atta, was under surveillance by authorities the year before the attacks, in Hamburg, Germany. Atta and his associates were well-known to law enforcement and intelligence agencies, U.S. and foreign, long before the 9/11 terror attacks.

"What did they know and when did they know it? That is a key question for the 9/11 Commission to ask, and answer."

It is interesting to note that the Commission staffer who received – and discounted – the "Able Danger" information, Dietrich L. Snell, is the prosecutor who convicted Abdul Hakim Murad in the "Bojinka" terrorist conspiracy case, a 1995 plot to crash airplanes into several U.S. landmark buildings, including the Pentagon and the World Trade Center – a scheme that later morphed into the 9/11 conspiracy. Murad offered to cooperate with investigators in return for a sentence reduction, but prosecutors, led by Snell, turned him down. Go here for the whole story.

The list of "mistakes," glitches, and tales of staggering incompetence that preceded the worst "intelligence failure" since a certain wooden horse was brought behind the walls of Troy, is getting rather suspiciously long. Here's another:

"The National Security Agency intercepted two messages on the eve of the Sept. 11 attacks on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon warning that something was going to happen the next day, but the messages were not translated until Sept. 12, senior U.S. intelligence officials said yesterday.

"The Arabic-language messages said, 'The match is about to begin' and 'Tomorrow is zero hour.' They were discussed Tuesday before the House-Senate intelligence committee during closed-door questioning of Lt. Gen. Michael V. Hayden, director of the NSA, the agency responsible for intercepting and analyzing electronic messages."

This Washington Post story, you'll recall – and certainly Slate media columnist Jack Shafer will recall it – was the occasion for a stern rebuke from the White House, and especially from Vice President Dick Cheney, whose anger was sufficient to spark an FBI investigation into who leaked the truth.

As we approach the fourth anniversary of the 9/11 terrorist attacks, the official story of what happened that day, and how it happened, is beginning to unravel is a spectacular manner. The official version is that the nineteen conspirators, acting alone and without the foreknowledge or even the suspicion of any outside agency, pulled off a complex series of operations involving at least four separate airplanes, all carried out within minutes of each other, pirouetting in the sky in perfect synchronicity before barreling down on their targets nearly simultaneously. This fiery moment was the climax of years – as many as five years – of plotting, preparations, and a largely subterranean existence lived by the conspirators, until they emerged, on that fateful day, like avenging angels of darkness coming down from the sky.

However, the various anomalies that go unexplained by this fanciful theory have begun to accumulate until the pressure to revise what we know of the history of the 9/11 conspiracy has become irresistible. The "Able Danger" revelations merely confirm what we've been saying in this space for years: that revisionism in this area of historical research is essential if we're going to begin to understand 9/11, and all that followed from it. As Condi Rice's appearance before the 9/11 Commission showed, the administration knew a lot more than it ever told anyone.

In December, 2001, Carl Cameron did a four-part series on Fox News that detailed extensive Israeli spying in the U.S., a report that proved prescient in light of recent developments, and he started out his riveting account with a bang:

"Since September 11, more than 60 Israelis have been arrested or detained, either under the new patriot anti-terrorism law, or for immigration violations. A handful of active Israeli military were among those detained, according to investigators, who say some of the detainees also failed polygraph questions when asked about alleged surveillance activities against and in the United States.

"There is no indication that the Israelis were involved in the 9-11 attacks, but investigators suspect that they Israelis may have gathered intelligence about the attacks in advance, and not shared it. A highly placed investigator said there are 'tie-ins.' But when asked for details, he flatly refused to describe them, saying, 'evidence linking these Israelis to 9-11 is classified. I cannot tell you about evidence that has been gathered. It's classified information.'"

While the story was largely ignored in the U.S., Germany's Die Zeit followed it up, in 2002, with an account entitled "Next Door to Mohammed Atta," in which the respected German weekly detailed close surveillance of Atta and his crew in southern Florida by Israeli intelligence in the months leading up to 9/11.

In April, 2004, I wrote about another Die Zeit piece by the same author, Oliver Schrom, entitled "Deadly Mistakes," a fascinating chronology of the errors, bureaucratic bungling, and seemingly deliberate obstructions that prevented U.S. authorities from taking what they knew about the hijackers, putting it together, and apprehending Atta and his gang before they could pull off their deadly deed. From Schrom we learned that the fabled Presidential Daily Briefing (PDB) for August 6, 2001, whose title – "Bin Laden Determined to Strike in U.S" – Rice famously blurted out at her appearance before the 9/11 Commission, was originally much longer than the version finally declassified and released by the White House. In the course of this account, Schrom also revealed the following:

"Langley, August 23, 2001. The Israeli Mossad intelligence agency handed its American counterpart a list of names of terrorists who were staying in the US and were presumably planning to launch an attack in the foreseeable future. According to documents obtained by Die Zeit, Mossad agents in the US were in all probability surveilling at least four of the 19 hijackers, among them [Khalid ] al-Midhar. The CIA now does what it should have done 18 months earlier. It informs the State Dept., the FBI and the INS. The names al-Midhar and [Nawaf] al-Hazmi are promptly put on an investigation list, as probable members of al-Qaeda. Al-Midhar is expressly noted as a probable accomplice in the USS Cole attack. The first acknowledgement arrives quickly. The INS writes that according to its information, both men are currently in the US.

"Now both men are pursued vigorously…."

These individuals – Atta, Khalid al-Midhar, Nawaf al-Hazmi, and Marwan al-Shehhi – are the very same "Brooklyn cell" identified by the "Able Danger" data-miners. The Mossad "observed" them for nearly half a year, and then, at the very last moment, turned over their names to the Americans. Too late, as it turns out: but is that really the end of the story?

In both instances, you'll note, we have the same sort of excuse – not quite airtight – for why we didn't move to apprehend the 9/11 plotters. In the case of the "Able Danger" operation, although the authorities had the legal means at their disposal, they were supposedly restrained by the recent memory of … Waco. This seems not at all credible: is there really any comparison between the figures of David Koresh and Osama bin Laden, either in terms of impact or importance? One was a marginal messiah of a homegrown mini-cult, the other an international terrorist leader of a well-financed and far-flung military organization.

In the case of the Israelis' belated intelligence-sharing, the rationale for inaction was supposedly due to legal constraints that erected a "firewall" preventing the sharing of intelligence procured by different agencies, notably the FBI and the CIA. As critics of this excuse-making note, however, law enforcement agencies failed to make proper use of the legal tools available to them:

"On May 24, 2002, in response to an FOIA lawsuit filed by the Electronic Privacy Information Center, the FBI released a confidential memorandum sent by a Justice Department official to an FBI lawyer in April 2000. The memo voiced concern about mistakes made by the FBI's International Terrorism Operations Section, and in particular, by that Section's (UBL) Osama Bin Laden Unit: 'You have a pattern of occurrences indicating an inability on the part of the FBI to manage its FISAs [foreign intelligence surveillance operations].' One well-publicized episode revealed that an FBI agent had prevented Minneapolis agents from obtaining a warrant to search Zacarias Moussaoui's computer just a month before 9/11. This, apparently, was not an isolated incident. …

"We now know that two of the 9/11 highjackers were on FBI watch lists of suspected terrorists, yet they were able to enter the country and remain undetected. In March 2002 the media reported that the INS had wrongly issued visa waivers for four Pakistanis who arrived in the US on a Russian merchant ship and quickly disappeared."

We're supposed to believe that, if only we'd passed the PATRIOT Act before 9/11, and subjected ourselves to a regime of total surveillance, giving up such remnants of our civil liberties as still existed, we might have escaped the wiles of Bin Laden and his fellow Islamist supermen, who single-handedly pulled off a spectacular terrorist act that changed the course of history. Now, according to this all-too-familiar refrain, we'll just have to get used to having our email read, our phones tapped, and our every movement kept under close surveillance by our beneficent and all-knowing government. The only alternative is living at the mercy of terrorists.

As we are beginning to learn, however, that is lie, and a rather self-serving one to boot. It wasn't the lack of information, or an inability to detect the death cultists in our midst, that prevented us from stopping the plot dead in its tracks. Rather, it was a persistent obstructionism coming from some quarters. As Coleen Rowley, the FBI agent who blew the whistle on the efforts of the FBI's Washington office to quash the investigation into al-Qaeda, put it:

"I know I shouldn't be flippant about this, but jokes were actually made that the key FBIHQ personnel had to be spies or moles, like Robert Hansen, who were actually working for Osama Bin Laden to have so undercut Minneapolis' effort."

As the number of unfortunate "coincidences" and "mistakes" begins to pile up, Rowley's quip is no longer a joke. Is it possible that Bin Laden had allies, enablers, some of them inside the U.S. government? In a September 13, 2001 New York Times column that purported to give an exclusive window on what went on inside the presidential bunker as the Twin Towers burned, William Safire wrote:

"A threatening message received by the Secret Service was relayed to the agents with the president that "Air Force One is next." According to the high official, American code words were used showing a knowledge of procedures that made the threat credible.

"(I have a second, on-the-record source about that: Karl Rove, the president's senior adviser, tells me: "When the president said `I don't want some tinhorn terrorists keeping me out of Washington,' the Secret Service informed him that the threat contained language that was evidence that the terrorists had knowledge of his procedures and whereabouts. In light of the specific and credible threat, it was decided to get airborne with a fighter escort.")

The terrorists could have had knowledge of top secret U.S. security procedures only if they had moles – spies – inside the government. How else would Bin Laden's boys get direct access to our code words?

No one doubts that the nineteen highjackers, and the al-Qaeda organization, financed, organized, and carried out the 9/11 terrorist attacks. But there is growing doubt that they did it without at least the passive collaboration of a silent partner, one who wielded considerable influence on our government – and had ready access to its secrets. In retrospect, it appears as if Atta and his fellow mass murderers had a guardian angel – or rather, a guardian devil – watching over them. At every turn, just when it seemed they would be apprehended, fate – or whomever – intervened, obstructing the normal means of interception and keeping the conspiracy on track. It's almost as if they traveled in a security bubble, protected by – what? By whom?

I can hear the skeptics now: It's a "conspiracy theory"! Yikes! But what explanation for how and why 9/11 happened isn't a "conspiracy theory," after all? Atta & Co. certainly didn't advertise their plans. The question is, will we accept the Official Conspiracy Theory, or an alternative one that comports with all the known facts?

I found a link to a video where Curt Weldon is talking about the army intelligence team knowing about 5 Al-Qaeda cells, it even shows a chart of the cells connections, the streaming video is 1:22 (1 hour, 22 minutes) long, but I can't get it to play past the 35 minute point.

There will be an Able Danger background briefing at 2 p.m. EDT in the OSD Executive Conference Center , Pentagon 2C554, Room #7.

Journalists without a Pentagon building pass will be picked up at the North Parking Entrance only. Plan to arrive no later than 1:30 p.m.; have proof of affiliation and two forms of photo identification. Please call (703) 697-5131 for escort into the building.

...new developments in the spin of the official "plotline" for the alleged suspects:

Terrorist Known Before 9/11, More Sayhttp://www.nytimes.com/2005/09/02/politics/02intel.html

By THOM SHANKERPublished: September 2, 2005

WASHINGTON, Sept. 1 - A Defense Department inquiry has found three more people who recall seeing an intelligence briefing slide that identified the ringleader of the Sept. 11 attacks a year before the hijackings and terrorist strikes, Pentagon and military officials said Thursday.Skip to next paragraphThreats and ResponsesGo to Complete Coverage

But the officials said investigators who reviewed thousands of documents and electronic files from a secret counterterrorism planning unit had not found the chart itself, or any evidence the chart ever existed.

The officials acknowledged that documents and electronic files created by the unit, known as Able Danger, were destroyed under standing orders that limit the military's use of intelligence gathered about people in the United States.

At a Pentagon briefing on Thursday, four intelligence or military officials said investigators had interviewed 80 people who served directly with Able Danger, a team organized to write a counterterrorism campaign plan, or were closely associated with it.

Of those 80, 5 in all now say they saw the chart, including Capt. Scott J. Phillpott of the Navy and Lt. Col. Anthony Shaffer of the Army, whose recent comments first brought attention to Able Danger..."

Just finished reading "Seeds of Fire" again, more than 90% of the book is actually about the student uprising in China in 1989 and subsequent massacre in Tianamen Square. The 9/11 related material is very sparse and basically says that China was behind the financing of Usama bin Oswald and is working with the Israeli Mossad to overthrow America as a world superpower.

I think Mr. Thomas, like Mr. Ruppert has watched too many Bond movies and some err, 'gadget envy.'

"...A copy of the Able Danger chart that identified lead 9/11 hijacker Mohamed Atta as a terrorist operating inside the U.S. a year before the 9/11 attacks is clearly visible in a video of a 2002 speech by delivered by Rep. Curt Weldon to the Heritage Foundation.

The Pentagon, the 9/11 Commission and the Senate Intelligence Committee are currently seeking evidence that the bombshell chart, featuring a photo Atta, ever existed - as claimed by three members of the Able Danger team, along with Rep. Weldon. But so far, no physical evidence of the controversial document has surfaced..."

by Shaun WatermanUPI Homeland and National Security EditorWashington (UPI) Sep 08, 2005The congressman who first made public claims that a secret Pentagon data mining project linked the Sept. 11 attacks ringleader to al-Qaida more than a year before the attacks took place says he does not believe the military's account of how the results of the project's work came to be destroyed.

Last week, Pentagon officials told a hastily arranged briefing for reporters that much data generated by the project - code-named Able Danger - was destroyed in accordance with standard operating procedure for handling material that might contain the names of Americans.

Weldon said he had asked the Pentagon for the certificates of destruction that military officials must complete when classified data is destroyed.

He said that there had been "a second elimination of data in 2003," in addition to the destruction acknowledged last week.

Weldon said that a hearing next week before the Senate Judiciary Committee would hear testimony from the individual who destroyed the data.

"For some reason, the bureaucracy in the Pentagon - I mean the civilian bureaucracy - didn't want this to get out," he said.

[excerpt]The Steering Committee’s decision could hinge on the lawmakers’ reputations from their work on foreign-policy issues in which both lawmakers bucked conventional wisdom and the establishment’s position.

But Weldon also has taken on the CIA and Pentagon. He wrote Countdown to Terror: The Top-Secret Information that Could Prevent the Next Terrorist Attack on America and How the CIA has Ignored It, which was published this year and ridiculed in some foreign-policy circles.

Weldon also has alleged that analysts working for a Pentagon program called “Able Danger” had identified Mohammed Atta and three other hijackers in 1999 but that Pentagon lawyers did not share the information with the FBI. The Pentagon has disputed the allegations.

Whatever the outcome in the contest for the Homeland Security chairmanship, Weldon is scheduled to testify at a Senate Judiciary Committee hearing next week in which he said a witness will testify that he was ordered to destroy thousands of pages of computer data relating to Atta and that the person will state who gave him the order to destroy that information.[excerpt] http://tinyurl.com/7v98f

WASHINGTON - Former members of the Sept. 11 commission on Wednesday dismissed assertions that aPentagon intelligence unit identified lead hijacker Mohamed Atta as an member of al-Qaida long before the 2001 attacks.

The ex-commissioners also criticized the government for not putting in place changes recommended last year in homeland security and emergency response. They pointed most notably to the failure to improve communication systems, which they said might have saved lives after Hurricane Katrina.

Rep. Curt Weldon (news, bio, voting record), R-Pa., had accused the commission of ignoring intelligence about Atta while it investigated the attacks. The commission's former chairman, Thomas Kean, said there was no evidence anyone in the government knew about Atta before Sept. 11, 2001.

Two military officers, Army Lt. Col. Anthony Shaffer and Navy Capt. Scott Phillpott, claimed a classified military intelligence unit, known as "Able Danger," identified Atta before the attacks. Shaffer has said three other hijackers were identified, too.

Kean said the recollections of the intelligence officers cannot be verified by any document.

"Bluntly, it just didn't happen and that's the conclusion of all 10 of us," said a former commissioner, ex-Sen. Slade Gorton, R-Wash.

Pentagon officials said this month that they could find no documents to back up the claims.

According to Weldon, members of "Able Danger" identified Atta and three other hijackers in 1999 as potential members of a terrorist cell in New York City. Weldon said Pentagon lawyers rejected the unit's recommendation that the information be turned over to theFBI in 2000.

Weldon's spokesman, John Tomaszewski, said no commissioners have met with anyone from Able Danger "yet they choose to speak with some form of certainty without firsthand knowledge."

Separately, the former commissioners criticized Congress for not updating communications rules to help police, fire, and rescue personnel in a crisis such as Katrina.

"It is a scandal in our minds," Kean said.

The commissioners also faulted state, local, and federal authorities responding to Katrina for not having a clear chain of command, leading to some of the same confusion that plagued the Sept. 11 rescue effort.http://tinyurl.com/7662h

"...There are claims this noon that government officials knew the identities of some of the "9/11" hijackers and the danger they posed two years before the attacks.Officials say the classified document titled "able danger" identified Mohamed Atta and four other hijackers.

Eyewitness News has learned there are also claims by one congressman that following the attack of a Pentagon employee was ordered to destroy the document. That employee is set to testify next week before the senate judiciary committee.

"...American aviation officials were warned as early as 1998 that al-Qaida could “seek to hijack a commercial jet and slam it into a U.S. landmark,” according to previously secret portions of a report prepared last year by the Sept. 11 commission...

...The newly disclosed material ... adds significant new details about the nature and specificity of federal aviation warnings over the years...

...Some of the details were contained in confidential bulletins circulated by the agency to airports and airlines, and some were in its internal reports..." [ Edited Fri Sep 16 2005, 10:05PM ]

A Pentagon employee was ordered to destroy documents that identified Mohamed Atta as a terrorist two years before the 2001 attacks, a congressman said Thursday.

The employee is prepared to testify next week before the Senate Judiciary Committee and was expected to identify the person who ordered him to destroy the large volume of documents, said Rep. Curt Weldon (news, bio, voting record), R-Pa.

Weldon declined to identify the employee, citing confidentiality matters. Weldon described the documents as "2.5 terabytes" — as much as one-fourth of all the printed materials in the Library of Congress, he added.

A Senate Judiciary Committee aide said the witnesses for Wednesday hearing had not been finalized and could not confirm Weldon's comments.

Army Maj. Paul Swiergosz, a Pentagon spokesman, said officials have been "fact-finding in earnest for quite some time."

"We've interviewed 80 people involved with Able Danger, combed through hundreds of thousands of documents and millions of e-mails and have still found no documentation of Mohamed Atta," Swiergosz said.

He added that certain data had to be destroyed in accordance with existing regulations regarding "intelligence data on U.S. persons."

Weldon has said that Atta, the mastermind of the attacks of Sept. 11, 2001, and three other hijackers were identified in 1999 by a classified military intelligence unit known as "Able Danger," which determined they could be members of an al-Qaida cell.

On Wednesday, former members of the Sept. 11 commission dismissed the "Able Danger" assertions. One commissioner, ex-Sen. Slade Gorton, R-Wash., said, "Bluntly, it just didn't happen and that's the conclusion of all 10 of us."

Weldon responded angrily to Gorton's assertions.

"It's absolutely unbelievable that a commission would say this program just didn't exist," Weldon said Thursday.

Pentagon officials said this month they had found three more people who recall an intelligence chart identifying Atta as a terrorist prior to the Sept. 11 attacks.

WASHINGTON — The Pentagon is pressuring the Senate Judiciary Committee to close to the public next week's hearings on a former secret military intelligence unit called "Able Danger," two congressional sources have confirmed to FOX News.

Witnesses from the Pentagon are expected to testify at that hearing; that's why they want it classified. FOX News has learned that committee Chairman Arlen Specter's office is vigorously resisting the request.

Some former Able Danger analysts and Rep. Curt Weldon (search) say the formerly clandestine intelligence unit identified Mohammed Atta (search) and three other of the Sept. 11, 2001, hijackers one year before the attacks that left over 3,000 people dead. They also claim that their repeated requests to turn over the information to the FBI were ignored.

Weldon said a former Army officer will testify next week that he was also ordered to destroy data that included reference to Atta.

"In the summer of 2000, he was ordered and, or, he would go to jail if he didn't comply," the Pennsylvania Republican said. "He was ordered to destroy 2.5 terabytes of data specific to Able Danger, the Brooklyn [terror] cell and Mohammad Atta. He will name the person who ordered him to destroy that material."

Other witnesses will include an FBI agent who will testify that she set up three meetings in 2000 between the FBI's Washington field office and the Able Danger, but each was cancelled at the last minute, Weldon said.

The Pentagon has changed its position on this story, from originally questioning the very existence of Able Danger (search) to now confirming that the Defense Department has identified five former members of the unit who all say they remember Atta's picture or name, on a chart in 2000.Full article: http://tinyurl.com/dp2zc

I'm Curt Weldon, and I'm here to provide a response to the 9/11 Commission in their statements this week about Able Danger and the outrageous statement made by Slade Gorton that it just didn't exist.

And it is absolutely outrageous, especially from a commission that I supported, that spent $15 million with 80 staffers to give the American people and the Congress a full and complete understanding of what happened prior to 9/11.

They have maintained there is no information about Able Danger or the data mining work. They couldn't find anything.

So I brought some charts for you. These are all original charts. None of these charts were made after 9/11. These charts were all made before 9/11.

Now, granted, they're not all about Able Danger. They're not all about Mohammed Atta, nor Al Qaida.

They're about drug trafficking. They're about terrorist cells. They're about crime in Russia. They're about crime in Serbia. They're about the World Trade Center bombing in '93.

So this information is a compilation of work being done by the Army's LIWA Center, as well as some of the work being done by Able Danger on Mohammed Atta and Al Qaida.

It's absolutely unbelievable to me that a commission would come out and say that this program just didn't exist.

The Pentagon has acknowledged now, publicly, that they have identified five defense employees who either vividly remember identifying Mohammed Atta prior to 9/11 or seeing his name linked with a Brooklyn cell prior to 9/11.

We have Scott Philpott (ph), a Navy commanding officer, who's commanded one of our naval warships, an Annapolis graduate, who has come out publicly and risked his entire career to say what he'll say next Wednesday under oath: that he specifically remembers identifying Mohammed Atta in January and February of 2000, specifically; that he would stake his career on it. And that he was the leader of Able Danger.

We have Lieutenant Colonel Tony Shaffer -- who's outside in the hallway, who I couldn't bring into the House Gallery because of House rules, but who's available for you to talk to, outside -- who will testify under oath on Wednesday before the Senate that as a DIA liaison to Special Forces Command for Able Danger, he attempted to present information to the FBI on three occasions in September of 2000 about the Brooklyn cell and Mohammed Atta.

WELDON: We've identified the woman at the FBI who set those three meetings up. She will testify under oath at the Senate hearing next Wednesday that she actually organized three meetings. She knew the topics of the meetings because there had been other discussions that occurred prior to the attempt to set up those three meetings.

And in each of the cases of those three meetings, they were abruptly canceled by Pentagon lawyers hours before those meetings were to take place.

I asked the Pentagon had they talked to that FBI person. They said, "No."

And, by the way, the Pentagon did not conduct an investigation. There were no subpoenas. There were no witnesses under oath. It was an inquiry. There's a big difference between an inquiry and an investigation, as my colleagues on the Armed Services Committee brought up when we had a briefing last week with six or seven members of the committee.

What will be the added dimension to the Senate investigation and hearing that will take place on Wednesday is not just the five people that the Pentagon has confirmed, identified and knew about Mohammed Atta prior to 9/11, but we'll bring out the person who actually did much of the data analysis. Actually, his name, I think, has already been brought out in the public. That's J.D. (ph).

But the person who's not been brought out in the public yet, this individual who will testify that he was actually the one who destroyed 2.5 terabytes of data about Able Danger that included the Brooklyn cell and Mohammed Atta.

Now, I'm not a computer expert. I don't know what 2.5 terabytes of data are. But, John, I read your story. You called the Library of Congress.

And the Library of Congress, if we can believe this great reporter down here who I trust fully, told him that it's basically one-fourth of all the printed material that the Library of Congress has in their collection. Now, that's a lot of material.

So what we will have is a person who will testify under oath, on the record, that in the summer of 2000, he was ordered -- or he would lose his job and/or go to jail if he didn't comply -- he was ordered to destroy 2.5 terabytes of data specific to Able Danger, the Brooklyn cell and Mohammed Atta.

He will name the person who ordered him to destroy that material. And, furthermore, he will note that a commanding general from SOCOM -- Russ, what was his name?

STAFF: (OFF-MIKE)

WELDON: General Lambert was incensed when he found out that material that he was a customer for was destroyed without his approval.

So here we have a case where General Lambert at SOCOM was not told that an employee had been ordered to destroy all the material that he was a customer for. And that material related to Able Danger, it related to Al Qaida and it related to Mohammed Atta.

In addition, I urge you to go back and review, on the Heritage Commission Web site, a speech that I gave on May 23rd of 2002. That speech, which is one hour and 20 minutes long with questions, is about stovepipes. In fact, you'll see a chart there that I referred that I can't find.

WELDON: That chart refers to Able Danger.Full article: http://tinyurl.com/a46fj

TERROR ALERT WKS. BEFORE COLE ATTACK

September 17, 2005 -- WASHINGTON — Members of a secret Pentagon intelligence unit known as Able Danger warned top military generals that it had uncovered information of increased al Qaeda "activity" in Aden harbor less than three weeks before the attack on the USS Cole, The Post has learned.

In the latest explosive revelation in the Able Danger saga, two former members of the data-mining team are expected to testify to the Senate Judiciary Committee next week that they uncovered alarming terrorist activity and associations in Aden weeks before the Oct. 12, 2000, suicide bombing of the U.S. warship that killed 17 sailors.

Lt. Col. Anthony Shaffer, the Defense Intelligence Agency's former liaison to Able Danger, told The Post that Capt. Scott Phillpott, Able Danger's leader, briefed Gen. Peter Schoomaker, former head of Special Operations Command and now Army chief of staff, about the findings on Yemen "two or three weeks" before the Cole attack.

"Yemen was elevated by Able Danger to be one of the top three hot spots for al Qaeda in the entire world," Shaffer recalled.

Shaffer and two other officials familiar with Able Danger said contractors uncovered al Qaeda activities in Yemen through a search of Osama bin Laden's business ties.

The Pentagon had no immediate comment.http://tinyurl.com/cdsv2

Tech Tip: You can use BugMeNot to sign into news sites that require an account to access stories, http://www.bugmenot.com/

If you use Mozilla you can install a BugMeNot extention that allows you to right click in the password field and it will automatically fill in the required fields. Plugin is available here: http://roachfiend.com/archives/category/extensions/

We were stunned to learn that the Pentagon is calling for the Senate hearing regarding "Able Danger" scheduled for Wednesday, September 21st, to be closed to the public.

Recall that Able Danger was the data mining operation run out of the Defense Intelligence Agency that allegedly identified four of the 9/11 hijackers one year prior to the attacks. There has been much controversy surrounding these findings and their significance cannot be overstated. This information, relating to Able Danger, changes the entire 9/11 "story" and would therefore impact many of the 9/11 Commission’s recommendations. After attempting to seek the truth for four years, it would be a travesty to keep the facts surrounding this operation from the public. The insistence on secrecy by governmental agencies only makes their motives suspect and ultimately serves to keep the American public at risk.* * *September 11th AdvocatesKristen BreitweiserPatty CasazzaMonica GabrielleMindy KleinbergLorie Van Auken

P.S. When I called the 9/11 Commissioner's Deputy for Communications, Al Felzenberg, for a response to the CitizensWatch debate challenge to the Commissioners, he volunteered without prompting, before I could ask him about the challenge that if asked to appear to testify, 'they would.' Yes, I agree, let's get the most compromised member of the Commission, Philip Zelikow, up 'on the stand', before the Senate Judiciary Cmte and see him 'not recall' if Lt. Col. Shaffer mentioned the Brooklyn Cell, Atta or the other three hijackers that were identified by Able Danger. And then let's hear Michael Hurley, a third unknown staffer, and the as yet to be publicly identified White House Counsel who was present at the October '03 Bagram meeting in Afghanistan to all repeat what they apparently told Felzenberg for the Public Disource Project press release on the subject which was essentially "they ALL didn't recall!" Not very definitive -- very carefully worded, no?

I think better yet, given statements like that from Commissioner Gorton insisting "It (Able Danger) just didn't happen" we better get the three Commission staffers and the White House lawyer to take lie detector tests. And of course do the same to the five military intelligence personnel who have some forward to insist that indeed Able Danger did happen and it did identify Atta and the other hijackers a year before the attacks. Where the Commission failed to resolve discrepencies in testimony (for example Richard Clarke's account in his book Against All Enemies of Myers and Rumsfeld being very much in the loop even as each of them insists they weren't in the loop, and this UNDER OATH), the Congress and especially now, Senators Arlen Spector and Patrick Leahy must not.

Furthermore we must insist Congress dig deep on this one. The stakes are huge given the broad sweeping agenda that emerged from the Commission's work and cover-up. We must ask ourselves why the Commission was and remains so committed to a timeline that didn't put Atta in the U.S. until half way into 2001? What are they hiding? What was Atta doing in Las Vegas? The Commission doesn't know and said so. What was he doing on the indicted Republican-tied lobbyist Jack Abramhof Casino cruises in Florida before 9/11 (this according to an AP story)? The Commission failed to mention this altogether. And what about the Newsweek story that said that Atta had attended Maxwell Officer's School? Was that really a different M. Atta as they claimed but never substantiated? Come on folks! We are looking at the beginning of the dissembling of the lies surrounding 9/11 and the emergence of a scandal of epic proportion, especially if someone actually saved even a small piece of hard documentation for the Able Danger data-mining project.

-Kyle F. Hencehttp://tinyurl.com/7jnne

This is further proof for me that "Able Danger" is a red herring supreme deluxe, with a cherry on top.

(Admin: Please note, that Hopsicker's personal conclusion supports the official plotline, where i respectfully disagree.Also, every surveillance projects had nothing to do with the actual military operation itself.

That's what we also try to establish with this thread, including the possibility that Able Danger indeed did exist or is just a red herring to distract from the military operation and reinforce the official story)

Mohamed Atta may have been under U.S. military surveillance until just days before the 9.11 attack, long after the Tampa-based Able Danger military intelligence operation currently under scrutiny was disbanded, in early 2001.

On August 6, 2001, the same day Atta and Marwan Al-Shehhi returned to Venice after renting a car at Warrick's RentaCar in Pompano Beach, FL, and picking up Siad Al-Jarrah at the airport in Miami, the MadCowMorningNews has learned that a self-described former NAVY SEAL named Joe Gesell applied for and was hired as the night driver (they only need one) at Venice Yellow Cab.

Gesell squired Atta around Venice and Sarasota in his cab on a number of occasions. What raises suspicions that he may have been working for more than just tips is this: after starting his new job on the day of Atta's return, Gesell quit a month later, just one day after Atta left town for the last time.

If Gessell is shown to have taken part in unacknowledged U.S. military surveillance of Atta continuing until just before the attack, it would not be uncharacteristic... [ Edited Wed Sep 21 2005, 06:52PM ]

WASHINGTON (AP) — The Senate Judiciary Committee chairman said Wednesday he would look into whether the Pentagon obstructed his committee by refusing to allow testimony from five people who had knowledge of a secret military unit named "Able Danger."

The Pentagon (military intelligence) is restricted in spying on domestic targets.

Reaction

When members of Able Danger made their presentation at command headquarters at MacDill Air Force Base, Weldon said, the legal team "put stickies on the faces of Mohammed Atta on the chart," to reinforce that he was off-limits.

A story is fabricated (Able Danger) which alleges that the lead hijacker of the September 11th attacks was already identified by the Pentagon, but that military intelligence analists witheld information from the FBI, because they are not allowed to gather intelligence on domestic targets (US Citizens and others residing within the US legally).

Solution

New legislation is introduced, or existing legislation is amended to allow/increase possibilities for the Pentagon (military intelligence) to gather intelligence on domestic targets.

Possibly also measures to facilitate information sharing with the FBI and other agencies.

Chairman Arlen Specter (search) said Wednesday he wants answers from the Defense Department about Able Danger, a secret military unit that is said to have identified four of the Sept. 11 hijackers more than a year before the terrorist attacks.

Well you see it's like this, the persons that were reported to be hijackers that are still alive, well they were being impersonated by somebody else. Uhm, yeah, Atta was really 8 or 9 hijackers. He was in possession of advanced, ah, ah, technology.

That's right, he had a prototype All-CIA-Duh super-weapon. It was a quantum, spectral transmogrifier. Yeah, uhm, that's what it was. It even had special teleportation functions, which uhm, ah, allowed Atta to actually pilot all 4 planes, that is why the hijackings were sequential, in a row, you know.

From files found on a laptop found in uhm, that place, uhm, Talibanistan, we know the device had high-end communications built into it, the diagram clearly shows a piece of string connecting TWO DIXIE cups and even had an automatic FALAFEL warmer.grin)

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - ThePentagon and the Senate Judiciary Committee squabbled publicly on Friday about whether lawmakers could question five key witnesses in public about their claims the U.S. military identified four September 11 hijackers long before the 20001 attacks.

The Defense Department came under fire from Republican and Democratic lawmakers this week when it prohibited the same witnesses, including members of a secret military intelligence team code-named Able Danger, from appearing before the judiciary panel at a public hearing on Wednesday.

The panel's chairman, Republican Sen. Arlen Specter (news, bio, voting record) of Pennsylvania, said at Wednesday's hearing the Pentagon could be guilty of obstructing congressional proceedings. Other lawmakers accused the Defense Department of orchestrating a cover-up.

On Friday, the Senate committee announced the Pentagon had reversed its position and would allow the five witnesses to testify at a new public hearing scheduled for October 5.

The Pentagon denied anything had changed, despite behind-the-scenes negotiations to reach a solution agreeable to both sides.

National security adviser Stephen J. Hadley yesterday denied receiving a Defense Department chart that allegedly identified lead terrorist Mohamed Atta before the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks, dealing a blow to claims by a Republican congressman that have caused a political uproar in recent weeks.

Rep. Curt Weldon (Pa.) wrote in his book, "Countdown to Terror," earlier this year that he provided a chart to Hadley produced in 1999 by the Pentagon's "Able Danger" program, a secret effort to identify terrorists using publicly available data. Weldon said the chart identified Atta in connection with a Brooklyn, N.Y., terrorist cell...

...Army Reserve Lt. Col. Anthony Shaffer, Navy Capt. Scott Philpott and three civilians affiliated with Able Danger have told Pentagon investigators that they recalled seeing either Atta's name or photograph before Sept. 11, 2001. But no other evidence has emerged to support the claims. Pentagon investigators say they interviewed about 75 others affiliated with Able Danger, none of whom recalled an identification of Atta or other hijackers.

Shaffer has conceded that he based his recollection on the memories of others, and the Pentagon says he had contact with the now defunct 18-month project for a total of 27 days. Shaffer's security clearance was formally revoked on Monday for a series of unrelated violations, including allegations that he exaggerated his past actions to obtain a service medal, according to his attorney, Mark S. Zaid.

Shaffer denies the allegations and was entitled to the medal, Zaid said yesterday..."

NOTE: Stephen Hadley is close to PNAC-affiliated Neocons:

http://inn.globalfreepress.com/modules/news/article.php?storyid=436

"...From July 2000 to January 2001, Stephen Cambone [was] Staff Director for the Commission to Assess United States National Security Space Management and Organization.

In January 2001, NIPP (National Institute for Public Policy) President Keith Payne led a team that produced the study "Rationale and Requirements for Nuclear Forces and Arms Control".

Among the study team participants had been: Stephen Hadley, Stephen Cambone, James Woolsey, and Keith Payne who served on the Nuclear Deterrence Advisory Panel..."[ Edited Sat Sep 24 2005, 03:40PM ]

In a previous reply in this thread, I stated my suspicions that "Able Danger" is a fabrication created to ensure the Pentagon will be able to be active in domestic surveillance, and to ease restrictions on sharing intelligence with civil agencies such as the FBI.

The new "Strategy for Homeland Defense and Civil Support" also seems to contain exactly these objectives :

A new Pentagon strategy for securing the U.S. homeland calls for expanded U.S. military activity not only in the air and sea -- where the armed forces have historically guarded approaches to the country -- but also on the ground and in other less traditional, potentially more problematic areas such as intelligence sharing with civilian law enforcement.

The strategy is outlined in a 40-page document, approved last month, that marks the Pentagon's first attempt since the attacks of Sept. 11, 2001, to present a comprehensive plan for defending the U.S. homeland.

Department of Defense Releases the Strategy for Homeland Defense and Civil Support June 30, 2005 http://www.defenselink.mil/releases/2005/nr20050630-3843.html

A PDF version of the strategy is available at: http://www.defenselink.mil/news/Jun2005/d20050630homeland.pdf

"The role of the military within domestic American society, both by law and by history, has been carefully constrained, and there is nothing in our strategy that would move away from that historic principle," said Paul McHale, the Pentagon's assistant secretary for homeland defense.

Still, some of the provisions appear likely to draw concern from civil liberties groups that have warned against a growing military involvement in homeland missions and an erosion of long-established barriers to military surveillance and combat operations in the United States.

The document acknowledges, for instance, plans to team military intelligence analysts with civilian law enforcement to identify and track suspected terrorists.

Over the years, the (Posse Comitatus) law has come to reflect a more general reluctance to involve the military in domestic law enforcement, although its provisions have been amended from time to time to allow some exceptions, including a military role in putting down insurrections, in assisting in drug interdiction work, and in providing equipment, training and advice.

Along with civil liberties groups, many senior Pentagon officials have tended to be wary of seeing troops operate on U.S. soil. Military commanders argue that their personnel are not specifically trained in domestic security, and they worry that homeland tasks could lead to serious political problems. In the area of intelligence, the strategy speaks of developing "a cadre" of Pentagon terrorism specialists and of deploying "a number of them" to "interagency centers" for homeland defense and counterterrorism -- a reference to new teaming arrangements with the FBI and other domestic law enforcement agencies.

The document notes that this represents a significant departure from the Cold War when Pentagon analysts worked mostly with the State Department and the intelligence community to combat the Soviet Union.

"The move toward a domestic intelligence capability by the military is troubling," said Gene Healy, a senior editor at the Cato Institute, a nonprofit libertarian policy research group in Washington.

"The last time the military got heavily involved in domestic surveillance, during the Vietnam War era, military intelligence kept thousands of files on Americans guilty of nothing more than opposing the war," Healy said. "I don't think we want to go down that road again."

Four years after the nation's deadliest terror attack, evidence is accumulating that a super-secret Pentagon intelligence unit identified the organizer of the Sept. 11 hijackings, Mohamed Atta, as an Al Qaeda operative months before he entered the U.S.

The many investigations of Sept. 11, 2001, have turned up a half-dozen instances in which government agencies possessed information that might have led investigators to some part of the terrorist plot, although in most cases not in time to stop it.

But none of those leads likely would have taken them directly to Atta, the Egyptian architecture student who moved to the U.S. from Germany to take flying lessons and later served as Al Qaeda's U.S. field commander for the attacks.

Had the FBI been alerted to what the Pentagon purportedly knew in early 2000, Atta's name could have been put on a list that would have tagged him as someone to be watched the moment he stepped off a plane in Newark, N.J., in June of that year.

Physical and electronic surveillance of Atta, who lived openly in Florida for more than a year, and who acquired a driver's license and even an FAA pilot's license in his true name, might well have made it possible for the FBI to expose the Sept. 11 plot before the fact.

Atta is presumed to have been at the controls of American Airlines Flight 11 when it struck the north tower of the World Trade Center on Sept. 11, 2001.

The FBI has reviewed the voluminous records of its extensive Sept. 11 investigation and can find no mention of Atta before Sept. 11, a senior FBI official said. If the Pentagon knew about Atta in 2000 and failed to tell the FBI, the official said, "It could be a problem."

Anthony Shaffer, a civilian Pentagon employee, says he was asked in the summer of 2000 by a Navy captain, Scott Phillpott, to arrange a meeting between the FBI and representatives of the Pentagon intelligence program, code-named Able/Danger.

But he said the meeting was canceled after Pentagon lawyers concluded that information on suspected Al Qaeda operatives with ties to the U.S. might violate Pentagon prohibitions on retaining information on "U.S. persons," a term that includes U.S. citizens and permanent resident aliens.

...once again a bogus 9/11 trial only convicted a 'trail master', possibly even working as an informant for european or US Intel to fake recruit alleged terror idiots and now ending up as yet another scapegoat.

The real story is, that Yarkas prepared a case for the european sequel of the bogus war on terrorism.

What also noone reported, is that Yarkas was observed by european intel and -police for years and each time they saw 'Atta' together with him, it shows, that also an european pendant of "Able Danger" was in charge to cover-up and lay the groundwork for fake profiles of the official plotline of 9/11.

Both Yarkas and Atta had nothing to do with the military operation of 9/11. A cover-up of a plotline is still part of a plotline.

(VOA) Spain's High Court has convicted a suspected al-Qaida cell leader of conspiracy in the plotting of the September 11, 2001 attacks on the United States in Europe's biggest terror trial.

The court sentenced Imad Eddin Barakat Yarkas to 27 years in prison. Prosecutors say he arranged a meeting in Spain of key planners of the attacks in July, 2001. Two other suspects were acquitted of charges related to the attacks..."[ Edited Thu Sep 29 2005, 03:49AM ]

Able Danger" Found Mohammed Atta Connection to Rahman's Network at El Farouq Mosque in Brooklyn (CIA)...During the CIA's Jihad, Al-Farooq Mosque & the Alkifah Refugee Center in Brooklyn were Rahman's key bases of operation and a springboard for "the string of jihad offices that had been set up across America with the help of Saudi and American intelligence." cheers

WASHINGTON - An officer who has claimed that a classified military unit identified four Sept. 11 hijackers before the 2001 attacks is facingPentagon accusations of breaking numerous rules, allegations his lawyer suggests are aimed at undermining his credibility.

The alleged infractions by Army Lt. Col. Anthony Shaffer, 42, include obtaining a service medal under false pretenses, improperly flashing military identification while drunk and stealing pens, according to military paperwork shown by his attorney to The Associated Press.

Shaffer was one of the first to publicly link Sept. 11 leader Mohamed Atta to the unit code-named Able Danger. Shaffer was one of five witnesses the Pentagon ordered not to appear Sept. 21 before the Senate Judiciary Committee to discuss the unit's findings.

The military revoked Shaffer's top security clearance this month, a day before he was supposed to testify to a congressional committee.

Mark Zaid, Shaffer's attorney, said the Pentagon started looking into Shaffer's security clearance about the time in 2003 he met inAfghanistan with staff members of the bipartisan commission that studied the Sept. 11 attacks and told them about Able Danger.

WASHINGTON - An officer who has claimed that a classified military unit identified four Sept. 11 hijackers before the 2001 attacks is facing Pentagon accusations of breaking numerous rules, charges his lawyer says are aimed at hurting his credibility.

The alleged infractions by Army Lt. Col. Anthony Shaffer, 42, include obtaining a service medal under false pretenses, improperly flashing military identification while drunk and stealing pens, according to paperwork from the Pentagon's Defense Intelligence Agency shown by his attorney to The Associated Press.

Shaffer was one of the first to publicly link Sept. 11 leader Mohamed Atta to the unit code-named Able Danger. Shaffer was one of five witnesses the Pentagon ordered not to appear Sept. 21 before the Senate Judiciary Committee.

The military revoked Shaffer's top security clearance this month, a day before he was supposed to testify to a congressional committee.

Mark Zaid, Shaffer's attorney, said he can't prove the Pentagon went after Shaffer because he's a whistleblower, but "all the timing associated with the clearance issue has been suspiciously coincidental."

Citing concerns with the privacy act, a Defense Intelligence Agency spokesman declined to release any information on Shaffer.http://tinyurl.com/ctksl

2nd Lawmaker Credits Secret Intelligence Program

By DOUGLAS JEHLPublished: October 1, 2005

WASHINGTON, Sept. 30 - A second Republican member of Congress has said that Stephen Hadley, who was then the deputy national security adviser, was given a chart shortly after the Sept. 11 attacks that showed information collected about Al Qaeda before the attacks by a secret military intelligence program called Able Danger.

The account was provided by Representative Dan Burton of Indiana, who said in an interview that on Sept. 25, 2001, he attended a meeting with Mr. Hadley in the White House along with Representative Curt Weldon, Republican of Pennsylvania. Mr. Weldon has said that he gave Mr. Hadley such a chart at the meeting, but the White House had refused to comment on Mr. Weldon's account.

Told about Mr. Burton's account, a spokesman for Mr. Hadley, who is now the national security adviser, confirmed for the first time last week that Mr. Hadley recalled seeing such a chart in that time period. But the spokesman, Frederick Jones, said that Mr. Hadley did not recall whether he saw it during a meeting with Mr. Weldon, and that a search of National Security Council files had failed to produce such a chart.Full article: http://tinyurl.com/cwc4z

Inside the RingBy Bill Gertz and Rowan ScarboroughSeptember 30, 2005

Atta's photoCongressional investigators looking into the Special Operations Command data-mining activity known as Able Danger are trying to find a woman in California who first came up with a supposed photograph of September 11 terrorist leader Mohamed Atta months before the deadly suicide attacks.

The woman worked for a security contractor that obtained the photo of Atta and other Islamist militants through surveillance of a mosque, said Rep. Curt Weldon, a Pennsylvania Republican who has been looking into the matter.

"There were five cells of al Qaeda that were identified [by Able Danger], including the Brooklyn cell," Mr. Weldon told us.

I have a renewed respect for Congressman Weldon. It looks like not even the risk of losing a brand new $20 billion defense contract for his district can keep him quiet about Able Danger.

This video from Fox News Weekend Live, via QT Monster, says it all.

On October 7th, Weldon sent Rumsfeld a letter that reads in part:

You know as well as I that inside the Beltway, there is a time-honored tradition of smearing the accuser rather than answering the charge. That method is now apparently being employed in your department, and while it may be a familiar way of doing business in Washington, it is no less disappointing.

More significantly, Weldon then went on to tell Fox News viewers:

Catherine Herridge: Final question sir, we've made much of the fact that members of Able Danger claim that they identified Atta a year before the attacks, but not many people realize that the same project using similar data was able to identify a threat in Yemen a few months before the USS Cole was attacked. Do you believe that this is highly significant?

Curt Weldon: Absolutely, and the 9/11 Commission to call Able Danger historically insignificant is outrageous. It's going to come out eventually, Catherine, that we'll see that Able Danger not only knew about Mohamed Atta and the Brooklyn Cell one year before 9/11, but two weeks before the attack on the Cole, in fact, two days before the attack on the Cole, they saw an increase of activity that led them to say to the senior leadership in the Pentagon at that time, in the Clinton administration, there's something going to happen in Yemen and we better be on high alert, but it was discounted. That story has yet to be told to the American people. Another Able Danger successful activity that was thwarted.http://tinyurl.com/9vj7s

Link to video at the link above.

Now I'm really going to puke on my gnu slade shoes. Next Weldon will be trying to convince the world that operation Fable Deranger predicted the Bali bombings, the Madrid bombings and the London Tube bombings. !ill

"...Why were we not made aware of this by the 9/11 Commission? Why did Clinton National Security Adviser Sandy Berger, who plead guilty this year to destroying classified documents from the National Archives pertaining to terror threats on U.S. soil, commit this crime just before testifying before the 9/11 commission? Were copies of the documents shredded by Berger ever placed before the commission? Did the commission choose not to hear from Able Danger officers because of Jamie Gorelick? Where the commissioners aware of the State Department's 1996 warnings to Clinton about bin Laden and his lack of action?

Now we know the 9/11 Commission was a political whitewash and we still need real answers...

...The 9/11 Commission Report needs to be moved to the fiction section of the library. Clinton and Bush need to address the troubling issues of omission...

A draft proposal floating behind closed doors would reconstitute and improve upon a former Army data-mining program called Able Danger.

Able Providence, as the new program has been dubbed, would establish “robust open-source harvesting capabilities” to give military and law enforcement agencies the information to take the initiative in the war on terrorism—that is, to be able to plan and execute offensive measures—in addition to continued defensive actions.

In addition, the program would be driven by a presumption that use of weapons of mass destruction within the United States is possible. As a result, Able Providence would need to detect, track and target terrorists as they move from location to location and reorganize their cells.

As one part of the new data-mining effort, the proposal suggests using information about terrorist financing and the Islamist system worldwide to identify correlations.

The proposal, which GCN has seen, would place the Able Providence project within the Office of the Director of National Intelligence, with the Defense Department having joint oversight responsibilities.

A first-year budget of a little more than $26 million would cover the cost of a director drawn from the Senior Executive Service, a deputy director from SES (or a brigadier general), five planners, software and hardware, and office space.

To Rep. Curt Weldon (R-Pa.), vice chairman of the House Armed Forces and Homeland Security committees, the idea of implementing a robust data mining program targeting publicly available information is a no-brainer.

“This is what the business community uses. This is what the political community does,” Weldon said in an interview before a Senate committee hearing on Able Danger last month. “You’re getting the same information any corporation can get in America.”

But there are complex legal and practical considerations, such as privacy concerns, data retention policies and the possibility of errors in the information, that dog proposals such as this.

One example is Able Danger, the predecessor program, a pilot data- mining project run in 1999 and 2000 under the auspices of the Army Special Operations Command and the Land Information Warfare Activity.

Heated debate

There has been heated debate since the summer—and at least one hearing so far—over whether Able Danger identified one of the Sept. 11 hijackers, Mohammed Atta, a year before the attack.

But according to an individual associated with Able Danger who now works in the private sector, the program was intended to search publicly available information for useful data to answer a number of specific questions of military interest, not just possible terrorist activities. The source asked not to be identified because of concerns about possible retaliation.Full article: http://tinyurl.com/9z4ke

This just reinforces my thinking that 'Fable Deranger' is a dog and pony show that will lead to demands that the U.S. Military be allowed to 'legally' maintain databases of information on American citizens.

WASHINGTON, Oct. 19 (UPI) -- A vocal House Republican is calling for a new probe into what he says is a "witch-hunt" by defense officials against a Sept. 11 intelligence whistleblower.

Rep. Curt Weldon, R-Penn., told United Press International that officials at the Defense Intelligence Agency, or DIA, had "conducted a deliberate campaign of character assassination" against the whistleblower, retired U.S. Army Lt. Col. Anthony Shaffer.

Shaffer has said that a highly classified Pentagon data-mining project he worked on, codenamed Able Danger, identified the ringleaders of the Sept. 11 terror attacks as linked to al-Qaida more than a year before they hijacked four planes and crashed them, killing nearly 3,000 people.

Weldon told UPI he had written to the Department of Defense inspector general to ask for "an immediate formal inquiry, with people testifying under oath," into what he called "a clear witch-hunt" against Shaffer, who has been on administrative leave while minor allegations about some expenses are investigated.

Weldon's move comes after Shaffer said that boxes of his personal effects, returned to him by the DIA earlier this month, contained both government property and classified documents.

"Sending classified material through the mail is a felony, and much more serious than any of these minor, trumped up charges against (Shaffer)," he said, adding that "I want the appropriate persons held accountable."

Weldon said that the DIA had now taken steps to fire Shaffer. "It's outrageous and scandalous," he said.

The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Reichert). Under the Speaker's announced policy of January 4, 2005, the gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Weldon) is recognized for 60 minutes.

Mr. WELDON of Pennsylvania. Mr. Speaker, I rise tonight to talk to our colleagues and through our colleagues to the American people about an issue that troubles me greatly.

I have been in this institution 19 years, and during those 19 years I have been on the Committee on Armed Services. Currently, I am the vice chairman of that committee and chairman of the subcommittee that oversees the purchase of our weapons systems. In the past I have chaired the research subcommittee. I have chaired the readiness subcommittee, and I have spent every available hour of my time working to make sure that our military troops were properly protected and have the proper equipment and training.

I am a strong supporter of our military. Whether it was in the last 2 years of the Reagan administration, the four years of the Bush administration, the 8 years of the Clinton administration, or the current administration of President George W. Bush, I have been a strong supporter of our military. I am a strong supporter of President Bush. I campaigned for him. I am a strong supporter of Secretary Rumsfeld. I say all of that, Mr. Speaker, because tonight I rise to express my absolute outrage and disgust with what is happening in our defense intelligence agencies.

Mr. Speaker, back in 1999 when I was Chair of the defense research subcommittee, the Army was doing cutting-edge work on a new type of technology to allow us to understand and predict emerging transnational terrorist threats. That technology was being done at several locations, but was being led by our Special Forces Command. The work that they were doing was unprecedented. And because of what I saw there, I supported the development of a national capability of a collaborative center that the CIA would just not accept.

In fact, in November 4 of 1999, 2 years before 9/11, in a meeting in my office with the Deputy Secretary of Defense, Deputy Director of the CIA, Deputy Director of the FBI, we presented a nine-page proposal to create a national collaborative center. When we finished the brief, the CIA said we did not need that capability, and so before 9/11 we did not have it.

When President Bush came in after a year of research, he announced the formation of the Terrorism Threat Integration Center, exactly what I had proposed in 1999. Today it is known as the NCTC, the National Counterterrorism Center. But, Mr. Speaker, what troubles me is not the fact that we did not take those steps.

What troubles me is that I now have learned in the last 4 months that one of the tasks that was being done in 1999 and 2000 was a top-secret program organized at the request of the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, carried out by the general in charge of our Special Forces Command, a very elite unit focusing on information regarding al Qaeda. It was a military language effort to allow us to identify the key cells of al Qaeda around the world and to give the military the capability to plan actions against those cells so they could not attack us as they did in 1993 at the Trade Center, at the Khobar Towers, the U.S.S. Cole attack, and the African embassy bombings.

What I did not know, Mr. Speaker, up until June of this year, was that that secret program called Able Danger actually identified the Brooklyn cell of al Qaeda in January and February of 2000, over 1 year before 9/11 every happened. In addition, I learned that not only did we identify the Brooklyn cell of al Qaeda, but we identified Mohamed Atta as one of the members of that Brooklyn cell along with three other terrorists who were the leadership of the 9/11 attack.

I have also learned, Mr. Speaker, that in September of 2000, again, over 1 year before 9/11, that Able Danger team attempted on three separate occasions to provide information to the FBI about the Brooklyn cell of al Qaeda, and on three separate occasions they were denied by lawyers in the previous administration to transfer that information.

Mr. Speaker, this past Sunday on ``Meet the Press,'' Louis Freeh, FBI Director at the time, was interviewed by Tim Russert. The first question to Louis Freeh was in regard to the FBI's ability to ferret out the terrorists. Louis Freeh's response, which can be obtained by anyone in this country as a part of the official record, was, Well, Tim, we are now finding out that a top-secret program of the military called Able Danger actually identified the Brooklyn cell of al Qaeda and Mohammed Atta over a year before 9/11.

And what Louis Freeh said, Mr. Speaker, is that that kind of actionable data could have allowed us to prevent the hijackings that occurred on September 11.

So now we know, Mr. Speaker, that military intelligence officers working in a program authorized by the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, the general in charge of Special Forces Command, identified Mohammed Atta and three terrorists a year before 9/11, tried to transfer that information to the FBI were denied; and the FBI Director has now said publicly if he would have had that information, the FBI could have used it to perhaps prevent the hijackings that struck the World Trade Center, the Pentagon, and the plane that landed in Pennsylvania and perhaps saved 3,000 lives and changed the course of world history.

Mr. Speaker, I rise tonight because we have been trying to get the story out about Able Danger and what really happened. Unfortunately, Mr. Speaker, I have to rise tonight to tell you that as bad as this story is, and as bad as it is that the data was not transferred to the FBI, and as bad as it is that the 9/11 Commission totally ignored this entire story and referred to it as historically insignificant even though it was authorized by the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, even though Louis Freeh has now said it could have provided information to prevent the attack against us, the 9/11 Commission ignored it. Not because the commissioners ignored it, but because someone at the staff level on the

9/11 Commission staff decided for whatever reason that they did not want to pursue the Abel Danger story.

Mr. Speaker, in August and September I met with the military officials involved with Abel Danger and one by one they told their story, until, Mr. Speaker, leaders in the Defense Intelligence Agency, including the deputy director, decided they do not want the story told. I think because they perhaps are fearful of being embarrassed and humiliated.

So what direction had they taken, Mr. Speaker?

They have gagged the military officers. They have prevented them from talking to any Member of Congress. They have prevented them from talking to the media. And the Defense Intelligence Agency has began a process to destroy the career and the life of Lieutenant Colonel Anthony Shaffer.

Now, it might be easy for us to ignore this, Mr. Speaker. We all have busy careers and worry about reelections every 2 years and worry about our own families and our jobs. But I cannot do that in this case and neither can this body, and neither can the other body. You see, Lieutenant Colonel Shaffer took an oath to defend our Constitution. He took the words ``duty, honor, country'' seriously and devoted 23 years of his life in four deployed intelligence operations of our military to protect America.

During the time he served our country, he has received the Bronze Star, an award that does not come easily, for showing acts of courage, leadership, and bravery in the course of his activities.

[Time: 20:30]

He has received public commendations from previous directors of the Defense Intelligence Agency, including General Patrick Hughes, including generals at Special Forces Command, and including Admiral Wilson of the Defense Intelligence Agency. He has received dozens of letters and commendations for his work. The laudatory comments I reviewed in his files are unbelievable.

But, you see, Mr. Speaker, there is a problem. The Deputy Director of the Defense Intelligence Agency was in a meeting with Lieutenant Colonel Shaffer almost a year before 9/11, and Lieutenant Colonel Shaffer showed him a disk in his office with information about al Qaeda and Mohammed Atta, and the Deputy Director of the Defense Intelligence Agency stopped the briefing and said, you cannot show me that. I do not want to see it. It might contain information I cannot look at.

Now, Tony Shaffer was not in the room alone, Mr. Speaker. There were other people, and we know their names. So we have witnesses. Now, the Deputy Director has denied that meeting and denied he was there and denied this particular story, but the fact is he knows that we are going to pursue it.

So what has happened to Lieutenant Colonel Shaffer, Mr. Speaker? The Defense Intelligence Agency has lifted his security clearance. One day before he was to testify before the Senate Committee on the Judiciary, in uniform, they permanently removed his security clearance. And now our Defense Intelligence Agency has told Colonel Shaffer's lawyer that they plan to seek a permanent removal of his pay and his health care benefits for him and his two children. Why, Mr. Speaker? Because Lieutenant Colonel Shaffer, like Commander Scott Philpot of the Navy, like J. D. Smith, and like a host of other Able Danger employees, has told the truth.

Now, Mr. Speaker, I sat here in the 1990s and I sat here during the 9/11 investigation and watched a ridiculous situation develop with Sandy Berger, the National Security Adviser under President Clinton. He walked into the National Archives before he was to testify before the 9/11 Commission looking through documents. He took documents out of the archives and stuffed them in his socks and pants so that no one would see them as he left the National Archives. Now, that is a felony, tampering with Federal documents and removing classified information regarding our security and information that the 9/11 commission needed to see.

Sandy Berger initially lied about it. He said he did not do it. Then he admitted it, and he was given a punishment. And, oh, by the way, his security clearance was temporarily lifted, but he will get it back again, for lying, for stealing, and for committing an act of outrage against our country's security. Lieutenant Colonel Shaffer, a Bronze Star 23-year military veteran, simply told the truth and now his life is being ruined.

His career is ended. He is no longer in military intelligence. They have taken his security clearance, and they are about to destroy him as a person. They are about to deny him the basic health care and the salary that he has earned, and they are doing it in this way. This is outrageous. It is evil. They do not want to fire Tony because they also do not want him to talk to the media. So by suspending him and removing his pay and his health care, they hurt him bad, but he cannot talk because he is under suspension and his lawyer has advised him that to talk to the media, to talk to Members of Congress, even when he is not being paid, would cause him further problems and totally prevent him from ever having this gross problem reversed. Mr. Speaker, this is outrageous. Mr. Speaker, this is not America.

Over my 19 years in Congress, I have led 40 delegations to the former Soviet Union. I have sat in the face of the Soviet Communists and confronted them on full transparency. I sat at the table with President Lukashenko of Belarus, who has been called by our Secretary of State the last dictator in Europe. I took both delegations to North Korea, Mr. Speaker, and sat across the table from Kim Gye Gwan and I told him we abhor the way they treat their people, the way they lie about what is happening, and the way they distort information.

Mr. Speaker, I took three delegations to Libya to meet with Qadhafi, and I told him that we are absolutely outraged at what Libya did in helping complete the Lockerbie bombing and the bombing of the Berlin nightclub.

You know, Mr. Speaker, I never thought I would have to take the floor of this Chamber and make the same statements about the Defense Intelligence Agency. As a supporter of the President, as a supporter of the military, Mr. Speaker, if we allow this to go forward, then we send the signal to every man and woman wearing a uniform that if you tell the truth, you will be destroyed if a career bureaucrat above you does not like what you are saying. If you tell the truth, we will take your health care benefits away from your kids. If you tell the truth, we will ruin you.

Mr. Speaker, this is not America. Mr. Speaker, this is not what I have been told by Secretary Rumsfeld that we are doing with our troops in protecting them, in giving them the best equipment and the best training. This is not what I spend hours in committee hearings on. This sends the wrong signal to America's troops. It tells them, do not be honest. Do not respect the fact that you have to be truthful. If there is somebody that the truth offends, then you better be silent.

Mr. Speaker, I have today asked for an independent investigation of the Defense Intelligence Agency and their efforts at destroying Tony Shaffer's life. This is outrageous, Mr. Speaker. They trumped up charges against him. They said while he was overseas in Afghanistan, forward deployed, that he forwarded cell phone calls from his official phone to his personal phone; and when they checked that out, it ran up a cost to the taxpayers of about $60. The second verbal charge they gave him was that he went to a course at the Army War College and he got reimbursed for his travel, his mileage and tolls, 100-some dollars. And they said he received a commendation for which he was not entitled, even though it was signed by his commanding officer and the acting Secretary of the Army.

But they went beyond that, Mr. Speaker. They went beyond that with this man. They said he had $2,000 of debt, personal debt. Well, I would like to have every Pentagon employee tomorrow, I would like to have the senior leadership show us what debt they have in the Defense Intelligence Agency so we can make that public.

They even went to this length, Mr. Speaker: the Defense Intelligence Agency wrote in an official document that Lieutenant Colonel Shaffer stole public property. A serious charge. Well, when you check what that public property was, it was an assortment of pens, government pens. But what they did not say in the Defense Intelligence report was that he took those pens when he was 15 years of age and was with his father when he was on assignment at one of our embassy outposts. He took the pens to give to other students at the school when he was 15 years of age. And by the way, Mr. Speaker, it was Tony Shaffer himself who admitted to that thievery when he applied for his security clearance. So the Defense Intelligence Agency knew that during his entire career of 23 years, but they put that in the document against him.

This is a scandal, Mr. Speaker. It is an outrage. It is a travesty. Everyone that worked with Tony Shaffer, the Navy officers, the private citizens have all said the same thing. This is a scandal to get Tony Shaffer because he has told the truth.

Now, this Defense Intelligence Agency and this Deputy Director had the audacity to have their legal counsel send Tony Shaffer's lawyer a letter on September 23. I cannot put that letter in the RECORD because it is privileged information, but it will eventually come out. But in that letter, in the second to last paragraph, the legal counsel for the Defense Intelligence Agency says to Mr. Shaffer's lawyer, he cannot receive any more classified information from the Defense Intelligence Agency because I checked and his security clearances have all been removed. Therefore, he is not allowed to look at anything that is secret or confidential.

Now, that is a letter sent by the general counsel of the DIA on September 23 of this year. Two weeks later, Mr. Speaker, to show the stupidity of the Defense Intelligence Agency, they send seven packages to Mr. Shaffer's lawyer of his personal belongings, which the Deputy Director of the DIA told my staff 3 months ago did not exist any more. And in those seven boxes, Mr. Speaker, were five classified memos. The Defense Intelligence Agency sent five classified memos to Lieutenant Colonel Shaffer, which they told him on September 23 he was not allowed to have access to.

Mr. Speaker, that is a felony; and I have asked the Inspector General and the legal officials to investigate and prosecute the Defense Intelligence officials who sent five classified documents through the mail or by hand delivery to Tony Shaffer.

In addition, Mr. Speaker, the Defense Intelligence Agency, in its absolute total stupidity, included in those boxes $500 worth of Federal property, including a multi-hundred dollar GPS system owned by the Federal Government, which they sent to Tony Shaffer, I guess to keep. They also sent, Mr. Speaker, 25 pens, brand new, and marked on them is ``Property of the U.S. Government.'' The Defense Intelligence Agency, in its absolute utter stupidity, sent Tony Shaffer Federal property which they accused him of taking when he was 15 years of age.

Mr. Speaker, there is something desperately wrong here. There is a bureaucracy in the Defense Intelligence Agency that is out of control. They want to destroy the reputation of a 23-year military officer, Bronze Star recipient, hero of our country, with two kids because people in defense intelligence are embarrassed at what is going to come out.

And what is going to come out, Mr. Speaker? Well, we are going to find out, Mr. Speaker, that that unit, Able Danger, not only identified Mohammed Atta before 9/11, not only did they try to pass that information to the FBI, not only was that large data destroyed in the summer of 2000, but now, Mr. Speaker, I can add a new dimension to this whole story. Yesterday, Mr. Speaker, I met with another Able Danger official. I was not aware of this official's knowledge because he does not live within the Beltway.

This official, Mr. Speaker, has impeccable credentials. I cannot reveal his name today. I will to any Member of this body, any of our colleagues that want to come to me, I will tell you privately who this official is, and you will agree with me when I tell you his name that he has impeccable credentials. This official yesterday, Mr. Speaker, in a meeting in my office, told me that he has never been talked to by the Pentagon. He has never been talked to by the Defense Intelligence Agency in their supposed investigation. He has never been talked to by the 9/11 Commission staff in their investigation; yet this official had a leadership position in Able Danger.

This official told me that there is a separate cache of information collected from over 20 Federal agencies in 1999 and 2000 on Able Danger that still may exist. Now, the Pentagon has told us all this material was destroyed, and now I have a senior official telling me there is a second pot of information that may well still exist.http://tinyurl.com/bdtqz

Now, that is a letter sent by the general counsel of the DIA on September 23 of this year. Two weeks later, Mr. Speaker, to show the stupidity of the Defense Intelligence Agency, they send seven packages to Mr. Shaffer's lawyer of his personal belongings, which the Deputy Director of the DIA told my staff 3 months ago did not exist any more. And in those seven boxes, Mr. Speaker, were five classified memos. The Defense Intelligence Agency sent five classified memos to Lieutenant Colonel Shaffer, which they told him on September 23 he was not allowed to have access to.

Mr. Speaker, that is a felony; and I have asked the Inspector General and the legal officials to investigate and prosecute the Defense Intelligence officials who sent five classified documents through the mail or by hand delivery to Tony Shaffer.

In addition, Mr. Speaker, the Defense Intelligence Agency, in its absolute total stupidity, included in those boxes $500 worth of Federal property, including a multi-hundred dollar GPS system owned by the Federal Government, which they sent to Tony Shaffer, I guess to keep. They also sent, Mr. Speaker, 25 pens, brand new, and marked on them is ``Property of the U.S. Government.'' The Defense Intelligence Agency, in its absolute utter stupidity, sent Tony Shaffer Federal property which they accused him of taking when he was 15 years of age.

Mr. Speaker, there is something desperately wrong here. There is a bureaucracy in the Defense Intelligence Agency that is out of control. They want to destroy the reputation of a 23-year military officer, Bronze Star recipient, hero of our country, with two kids because people in defense intelligence are embarrassed at what is going to come out.

And what is going to come out, Mr. Speaker? Well, we are going to find out, Mr. Speaker, that that unit, Able Danger, not only identified Mohammed Atta before 9/11, not only did they try to pass that information to the FBI, not only was that large data destroyed in the summer of 2000, but now, Mr. Speaker, I can add a new dimension to this whole story. Yesterday, Mr. Speaker, I met with another Able Danger official. I was not aware of this official's knowledge because he does not live within the Beltway.

This official, Mr. Speaker, has impeccable credentials. I cannot reveal his name today. I will to any Member of this body, any of our colleagues that want to come to me, I will tell you privately who this official is, and you will agree with me when I tell you his name that he has impeccable credentials. This official yesterday, Mr. Speaker, in a meeting in my office, told me that he has never been talked to by the Pentagon. He has never been talked to by the Defense Intelligence Agency in their supposed investigation. He has never been talked to by the 9/11 Commission staff in their investigation; yet this official had a leadership position in Able Danger.

This official told me that there is a separate cache of information collected from over 20 Federal agencies in 1999 and 2000 on Able Danger that still may exist. Now, the Pentagon has told us all this material was destroyed, and now I have a senior official telling me there is a second pot of information that may well still exist.

Furthermore, at the hearing over in the Senate Committee on the Judiciary, when Senator Specter asked why this data was destroyed, the witness who destroyed the data said, well, I was told that we could not keep this data for more than 90 days because it might involve information that contains U.S. persons, so we had to destroy it.

[Time: 20:45]

Well, I found out that is not the story. The reason the data was destroyed was because Special Forces Command asked the Army for that data and within a matter of days, that data was destroyed so the Army would not pass it to Special Forces Command. Yet there still is, was and I hope still is a massive pot of data.

But furthermore, that official that I talked to yesterday will also say that there was no 90-day requirement, as was testified before the Senate Committee on the Judiciary. He said on a regular basis they kept information from Able Danger data mining for months and months and months. In fact, he will say he had a discussion with a lawyer in DOD named Schiffren who told him do not worry about it, just fill out a document, sign your name that you need it, put it in the box, and you can keep it as long as you want.

Mr. Speaker, that is entirely contradictory to what the Defense Intelligence Agency has been telling us, to what DOD has been telling us. Now we have someone who is willing to come forward and say that 90-day period is not real, they kept Able Danger information for months and months and months.

Mr. Speaker, there is something desperately wrong here. A sitting President of the United States resigned his position because he tried to cover up a third-rate burglary when some low-level operatives from the Republican committee to reelect him broke into the Democrat headquarters in Washington, D.C. No one was killed. No money was stolen. No State secrets were stolen. It was a third-rate burglary, but it caused the resignation of President Richard Nixon.

Mr. Speaker, we are talking about the deaths of 3,000 Americans.

Mr. Speaker, we are talking about 2.5 terabytes of data about al Qaeda. That is equal to one-fourth of all of the printed material in the Library of Congress.

Mr. Speaker, we are talking about Mohammed Atta and three of the terrorists that attacked us on 9/11.

Mr. Speaker, we are talking about military intelligence officers, including an Annapolis graduate who will command one of our destroyers in January of 2006 who risked his entire career to state on the record I will swear until I die that I saw Mohammed Atta's face every day starting in January of 2000, a year and a half before 9/11.

Mr. Speaker, this is not somebody off the street, this is a graduate of Annapolis, a 23-year Naval officer who will command one of our destroyers in January who is agreeing with Lieutenant Shaffer. We have three other people who have testified under oath that they saw the same photograph, and the person I met yesterday will testify that he had the name of a Mohammed Atta before 9/11 but not the face.

Mr. Speaker, this is not some third-rate burglary coverup. This is not some Watergate incident. This is an attempt to prevent the American people from knowing the facts about how we could have prevented 9/11 and people are covering it up today. They are ruining the career of a military officer to do it and we cannot let it stand. I do not care whether you are Democrat or Republican, you cannot let a lieutenant colonel's career be ruined because of some bureaucrat in the Defense Intelligence Agency. If we let that happen, then no one who wears the uniform will ever feel protected because we will have let them down. Anyone who wears the uniform of this country who is serving today expects us to back him or her up and that is not happening. We are seeing lying, distortion.

Mr. Speaker, do you know, Wolf Blitzer on CNN told my staff that a Department of Defense employee told him that Lieutenant Colonel Shaffer was having an affair with one of my employees. How low can we go, Mr. Speaker? How low can we go to allow this Defense Department to try to ruin the reputation and the personal life of a lieutenant colonel with a Bronze Star? To Wolf Blitzer, Mr. Speaker.

We need to know the name of that defense official who told Wolf Blitzer who told my staff, and he is not the only one. I have other media people who will come forward in this grand effort to destroy the reputation of a uniformed military officer, to create scandalous accusations. He does not even know my staff, to accuse him of stealing pens when he was 15, to take away his health care benefits for his two kids because he is telling the truth.

What do we stand for if not the truth? Is it more important that we be politically correct? Is it more important that I not rock the boat because my party is in the White House, because I campaigned for Bush, and support Don Rumsfeld. Is that more important? If that is more important, I do not want to be here. I will leave. I will leave my post, but I will not do it until we get justice for this man and for these people who the 9/11 Commission called historically insignificant.

Mr. Speaker, there is something wrong inside the Beltway.

Mr. Speaker, there is something desperately wrong when a military officer risks his life in Afghanistan time and again, embedded with our troops under

[Page: H8982] GPO's PDF

an assumed name with a false beard and a false identity, forward deployed with our troops, gets castigated, gets ridiculed, gets some low life scum at the Pentagon spreading malicious lies about this individual, and then say to his lawyer, we are going to take away his health care benefits, we are going to take away his salary.

Mr. Speaker, if we allow this to stand as Democrats and Republicans, then none of us deserve to be here. When we all go overseas and meet the troops, we tell them how proud we are of them. We provide funding for them. We give them training and take care of their families. What we are allowing to happen right now is the Defense Intelligence Agency to ruin the career and the life of a man who spent 23 years protecting his Nation. If Lieutenant Colonel Shaffer was telling this story alone in a vacuum, that would be one thing. But he has been corroborated over and over again. I have met with at least 10 people who fully corroborate what Tony Shaffer says. Those meetings with the FBI, the FBI employee still works there and she told the Senate Committee on the Judiciary, I set those meetings up with the FBI to transfer information about al Qaeda and Able Danger. So she is still there and she testified.

What we have here, I am convinced of this now, is an aggressive attempt by CIA management to cover up their own shortcomings in not being able to do what the Able Danger team did: They identified Mohammed Atta and the al Qaeda cell of Brooklyn 1 year before Ð9/11. But even before that, as the story unfolds, you are going to hear the story that they also identified the threat to the USS Cole 2 weeks before the attack, and 2 days before the attack were screaming not to let the USS Cole come into the harbor at Yemen because they knew something was about to happen.

Mr. Speaker, bad news never comes easy; but in a democracy, the bad news has to come out so we can make sure it does not happen again.

Mr. Speaker, this whole thing started, not to embarrass anyone, this whole thing started because none of us knew that Mohammed Atta was identified before 9/11. It started because this Congress, this body in particular, tried to establish what is now in place back in 1999, a national collaborative center, but the CIA said we did not need it. The American people deserve to

have the answers here. They deserve to know why 3,000 people died. They deserve to know what we could have done and should have done to better prepare ourselves and to work to prepare for the next incident. The American people need to know where those multiple terabytes of data is. Is it still being used? We know in January of 2001, General Shelton was given a 3-hour briefing on Able Danger. So even if they destroyed the data back in the summer of 2000, in January of 2001 there was enough material to give General Shelton, Commander of the Joint Chiefs, a 3-hour briefing.

Mr. Speaker, there is something here. I am not a conspiracy theorist, but there is something desperately wrong, Mr. Speaker. There is something outrageous at work here. This is not a third-rate burglary of a political campaign headquarters. This involved what is right now the covering up of information that led to the deaths of 3,000 people, changed the course of history, led to the invasion of Iraq and Afghanistan, and has disrupted our country, our economy and people's lives.

Mr. Speaker, we could ignore this. I cannot. If it means I have to resign from this body, I will resign. I will not allow, after 19 years in this body and as a vice chairman of the Committee on Armed Services, bureaucrats in the Defense Intelligence Agency to concoct stories, to talk about the theft of pens when this lieutenant colonel was 15 years old, to talk about this man's personal debt of $2,000. I would hate to check the indebtedness of Members of Congress. I know mine is more than $2,000.

Mr. Speaker, this is not America. I had a group of college students down from Drexel University. There were about 20 of them, including representative students from eight other nations. We talked about this. Of course we have talked about all of the problem countries in the world. We talk about our values as a Nation, the need for a democracy to have people involved, to have transparency, to have people who respect the rule of law and the Constitution.

How do I tell them that is what is working here, Mr. Speaker, when the Pentagon says that these people who simply want to tell the truth are not allowed? They are saying it is for classified purposes, yet the DOD lawyer on the Senate side there is nothing classified about any of the information. It is not about classified programs. I would be the last to want to see anything classified revealed. I have seen many, many instances where I have been given sensitive information that only a few people in the Congress and the country had. I would never reveal it. It is not about that. This is not about the DIA, this is not about the CIA, this is about CYA. It is about CYA by bureaucrats in the Defense Intelligence Agency and possibly some political operatives that do not want the facts to come out about Able Danger and the information that the Able Danger team put together. And in the process, they are going to destroy a man, a man who has been recognized by his country, who has a family, and who simply wants to do the right thing.

Mr. Speaker, I hated to take the floor tonight, but I did not know what else to do. We have committees of Congress working on this. I want to thank the gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Wolf), chairman of the FBI Appropriation Committee on Oversight. He is as outraged as I am. I want to thank the gentleman from Wisconsin (Mr. Sensenbrenner), who is looking at this, and the gentleman from California (Chairman Hunter). The Committee on Armed Services has a full-time staffer assigned to get to the facts of this. I want to thank the gentleman from New York (Mr. King), chairman of the Committee on Homeland Security, because he is looking at this. I want to thank the gentleman from Michigan (Chairman Hoekstra) and the Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence. He has met with Tony Shaffer and has offered to get more information. I want to thank my colleagues on the other side of the aisle for standing up and beginning to ask questions, and I want to thank Senator Specter and Senator Biden, who attended a Committee on the Judiciary hearing and expressed their outrage. I want to thank Senator Sessions, Senator Kyl, and Senator Grassley, who were all there. In fact, Senator Grassley called it a coverup.

Mr. Speaker, I cannot tell you the number of Members who have come to me and said this is unacceptable. I would hope that as a result of what we have heard tonight every Member of Congress will ask for an inquiry. The gentlewoman from Georgia (Ms. McKinney) wrote a letter to the chairman of the Committee on Armed Services asking for an investigation. We have from Republicans to Democrats, left to right, conservatives to liberals. What is happening here is unacceptable. It is unimaginable. It is un-American. All over the world tonight, young Americans are wearing our uniforms. They are doing a great job. They make us all proud when we travel overseas. They make us proud because of the pride they have. When I talk to them, they say I am glad to be doing what I am doing. I am doing the right thing for our country. I will go any place the Commander in Chief sends me. Whether I am in Afghanistan or Iraq, they will tell me that.

[Time: 21:00]

Whether we are in Kosovo or Somalia, they will tell us that. Whether we are at Hurricane Katrina, whether we are at Hurricane Andrew, or whether we are out in California, the earthquake, or the Midwestern floods, our troops are all the same. They respect our country. They respect our Constitution. If we allow this travesty to continue, Mr. Speaker, then we have let all of those people down for some nameless, faceless bureaucrat who is fearful that the information will finally come to light, that the DIA just did not get it.

Back in 1999 and 2000, they did not have a clue. They had millions of dollars, hundreds of millions of dollars, and could not do what a 20-member team did in being able to identify Mohammed Atta before the 9/11 attacks. DIA does not want that to come out, Mr. Speaker. They do not want that to come out. Heaven forbid the Defense Intelligence Agency, with hundreds of millions of dollars, would have a 20-member team do what they could not do because they were using new technology and new software. They do not want that to come out. That is why that Deputy Director, when he was at that meeting, said, I do not want to see this. Do not show it to me. And that is why today that Deputy Director is trying to ruin the career of Lieutenant Colonel Shaffer.

The only way to resolve this, Mr. Speaker, is to have a full independent investigation by the Inspector General of the Pentagon. I have asked Secretary Rumsfeld today to do that. I would ask my colleagues on both sides of the aisle to join me in that request. Let the independent inspector for the Pentagon go in, not DIA. DIA cannot investigate itself. It does not have the capability to do that. It does not have the integrity to do that. Let the Inspector General do the investigation and while that is being done, protect Lieutenant Colonel Shaffer. He does not deserve to have his career ruined or destroyed for telling the truth.

And while we are at it, Mr. Speaker, if DIA is going to continue to press this ridiculous set of facts, then as I said earlier, I want DIA prosecuted for the five felonies they committed in sending classified documents to a person that 2 weeks earlier they said was incapable of receiving classified information. And if this continues, I want DIA held responsible for illegally transferring $500 of public assets to a person, that in the process of sending that stuff to him, DIA committed fraud against the taxpayers. I want them held accountable: DIA's stupidity; DIA's incompetence.

We have a new nominee for the head of DIA, and I am going to ask every Senator to fully explore each of these issues before that person is confirmed. I will meet with every Senator personally and go over all of this information. And I would encourage the Senators and the House Members to interview the other people who worked with Lieutenant Colonel Shaffer and to get their assessments of what is going on there. They will all tell them the same thing: Shaffer is being abused and used as a scapegoat. If they can ruin Shaffer, they can silence the story.http://tinyurl.com/b4pts

Mr. Speaker, there is something desperately wrong when a military officer risks his life in Afghanistan time and again, embedded with our troops under an assumed name with a false beard and a false identity, forward deployed with our troops, gets castigated, gets ridiculed, gets some low life scum at the Pentagon spreading malicious lies about this individual, and then say to his lawyer, we are going to take away his health care benefits, we are going to take away his salary.

Mr. Speaker, if we allow this to stand as Democrats and Republicans, then none of us deserve to be here. When we all go overseas and meet the troops, we tell them how proud we are of them. We provide funding for them. We give them training and take care of their families. What we are allowing to happen right now is the Defense Intelligence Agency to ruin the career and the life of a man who spent 23 years protecting his Nation. If Lieutenant Colonel Shaffer was telling this story alone in a vacuum, that would be one thing. But he has been corroborated over and over again. I have met with at least 10 people who fully corroborate what Tony Shaffer says. Those meetings with the FBI, the FBI employee still works there and she told the Senate Committee on the Judiciary, I set those meetings up with the FBI to transfer information about al Qaeda and Able Danger. So she is still there and she testified.

What we have here, I am convinced of this now, is an aggressive attempt by CIA management to cover up their own shortcomings in not being able to do what the Able Danger team did: They identified Mohammed Atta and the al Qaeda cell of Brooklyn 1 year before Ð9/11. But even before that, as the story unfolds, you are going to hear the story that they also identified the threat to the USS Cole 2 weeks before the attack, and 2 days before the attack were screaming not to let the USS Cole come into the harbor at Yemen because they knew something was about to happen.

Mr. Speaker, bad news never comes easy; but in a democracy, the bad news has to come out so we can make sure it does not happen again.

Mr. Speaker, this whole thing started, not to embarrass anyone, this whole thing started because none of us knew that Mohammed Atta was identified before 9/11. It started because this Congress, this body in particular, tried to establish what is now in place back in 1999, a national collaborative center, but the CIA said we did not need it. The American people deserve to

have the answers here. They deserve to know why 3,000 people died. They deserve to know what we could have done and should have done to better prepare ourselves and to work to prepare for the next incident. The American people need to know where those multiple terabytes of data is. Is it still being used? We know in January of 2001, General Shelton was given a 3-hour briefing on Able Danger. So even if they destroyed the data back in the summer of 2000, in January of 2001 there was enough material to give General Shelton, Commander of the Joint Chiefs, a 3-hour briefing.

Mr. Speaker, there is something here. I am not a conspiracy theorist, but there is something desperately wrong, Mr. Speaker. There is something outrageous at work here. This is not a third-rate burglary of a political campaign headquarters. This involved what is right now the covering up of information that led to the deaths of 3,000 people, changed the course of history, led to the invasion of Iraq and Afghanistan, and has disrupted our country, our economy and people's lives.

Mr. Speaker, we could ignore this. I cannot. If it means I have to resign from this body, I will resign. I will not allow, after 19 years in this body and as a vice chairman of the Committee on Armed Services, bureaucrats in the Defense Intelligence Agency to concoct stories, to talk about the theft of pens when this lieutenant colonel was 15 years old, to talk about this man's personal debt of $2,000. I would hate to check the indebtedness of Members of Congress. I know mine is more than $2,000.

Mr. Speaker, this is not America. I had a group of college students down from Drexel University. There were about 20 of them, including representative students from eight other nations. We talked about this. Of course we have talked about all of the problem countries in the world. We talk about our values as a Nation, the need for a democracy to have people involved, to have transparency, to have people who respect the rule of law and the Constitution.

How do I tell them that is what is working here, Mr. Speaker, when the Pentagon says that these people who simply want to tell the truth are not allowed? They are saying it is for classified purposes, yet the DOD lawyer on the Senate side there is nothing classified about any of the information. It is not about classified programs. I would be the last to want to see anything classified revealed. I have seen many, many instances where I have been given sensitive information that only a few people in the Congress and the country had. I would never reveal it. It is not about that. This is not about the DIA, this is not about the CIA, this is about CYA. It is about CYA by bureaucrats in the Defense Intelligence Agency and possibly some political operatives that do not want the facts to come out about Able Danger and the information that the Able Danger team put together. And in the process, they are going to destroy a man, a man who has been recognized by his country, who has a family, and who simply wants to do the right thing.

Mr. Speaker, I hated to take the floor tonight, but I did not know what else to do. We have committees of Congress working on this. I want to thank the gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Wolf), chairman of the FBI Appropriation Committee on Oversight. He is as outraged as I am. I want to thank the gentleman from Wisconsin (Mr. Sensenbrenner), who is looking at this, and the gentleman from California (Chairman Hunter). The Committee on Armed Services has a full-time staffer assigned to get to the facts of this. I want to thank the gentleman from New York (Mr. King), chairman of the Committee on Homeland Security, because he is looking at this. I want to thank the gentleman from Michigan (Chairman Hoekstra) and the Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence. He has met with Tony Shaffer and has offered to get more information. I want to thank my colleagues on the other side of the aisle for standing up and beginning to ask questions, and I want to thank Senator Specter and Senator Biden, who attended a Committee on the Judiciary hearing and expressed their outrage. I want to thank Senator Sessions, Senator Kyl, and Senator Grassley, who were all there. In fact, Senator Grassley called it a coverup.

Mr. Speaker, I cannot tell you the number of Members who have come to me and said this is unacceptable. I would hope that as a result of what we have heard tonight every Member of Congress will ask for an inquiry. The gentlewoman from Georgia (Ms. McKinney) wrote a letter to the chairman of the Committee on Armed Services asking for an investigation. We have from Republicans to Democrats, left to right, conservatives to liberals. What is happening here is unacceptable. It is unimaginable. It is un-American. All over the world tonight, young Americans are wearing our uniforms. They are doing a great job. They make us all proud when we travel overseas. They make us proud because of the pride they have. When I talk to them, they say I am glad to be doing what I am doing. I am doing the right thing for our country. I will go any place the Commander in Chief sends me. Whether I am in Afghanistan or Iraq, they will tell me that.

[Time: 21:00]

Whether we are in Kosovo or Somalia, they will tell us that. Whether we are at Hurricane Katrina, whether we are at Hurricane Andrew, or whether we are out in California, the earthquake, or the Midwestern floods, our troops are all the same. They respect our country. They respect our Constitution. If we allow this travesty to continue, Mr. Speaker, then we have let all of those people down for some nameless, faceless bureaucrat who is fearful that the information will finally come to light, that the DIA just did not get it.

Back in 1999 and 2000, they did not have a clue. They had millions of dollars, hundreds of millions of dollars, and could not do what a 20-member team did in being able to identify Mohammed Atta before the 9/11 attacks. DIA does not want that to come out, Mr. Speaker. They do not want that to come out. Heaven forbid the Defense Intelligence Agency, with hundreds of millions of dollars, would have a 20-member team do what they could not do because they were using new technology and new software. They do not want that to come out. That is why that Deputy Director, when he was at that meeting, said, I do not want to see this. Do not show it to me. And that is why today that Deputy Director is trying to ruin the career of Lieutenant Colonel Shaffer.

The only way to resolve this, Mr. Speaker, is to have a full independent investigation by the Inspector General of the Pentagon. I have asked Secretary Rumsfeld today to do that. I would ask my colleagues on both sides of the aisle to join me in that request. Let the independent inspector for the Pentagon go in, not DIA. DIA cannot investigate itself. It does not have the capability to do that. It does not have the integrity to do that. Let the Inspector General do the investigation and while that is being done, protect Lieutenant Colonel Shaffer. He does not deserve to have his career ruined or destroyed for telling the truth.

And while we are at it, Mr. Speaker, if DIA is going to continue to press this ridiculous set of facts, then as I said earlier, I want DIA prosecuted for the five felonies they committed in sending classified documents to a person that 2 weeks earlier they said was incapable of receiving classified information. And if this continues, I want DIA held responsible for illegally transferring $500 of public assets to a person, that in the process of sending that stuff to him, DIA committed fraud against the taxpayers. I want them held accountable: DIA's stupidity; DIA's incompetence.

We have a new nominee for the head of DIA, and I am going to ask every Senator to fully explore each of these issues before that person is confirmed. I will meet with every Senator personally and go over all of this information. And I would encourage the Senators and the House Members to interview the other people who worked with Lieutenant Colonel Shaffer and to get their assessments of what is going on there. They will all tell them the same thing: Shaffer is being abused and used as a scapegoat. If they can ruin Shaffer, they can silence the story.

It cannot happen, Mr. Speaker. We cannot let it. That is not what America is about. That is not what we say to our enlisted personnel when they sign up for duty. That is not what we say when we pass our defense bills every year.

This man is being maligned and mistreated. He is being harassed. The most scurrilous accusations, totally unfounded, have been given to the American media; and I will name names, and I will ask for an investigation of the people who made those statements to these media people because it all needs to be put on the record.

And as someone tomorrow who will chair another hearing on our defense oversight to try to get the best value for the dollars for our military, I ask all of our colleagues, Mr. Speaker, on both sides of the aisle to join us. This is not Republicans or Democrats. It is about what is fundamental to this country. I would ask our constituents across America we represent to join us, to express their outrage, to e-mail, make phone calls, write letters to the Secretary of Defense, the President of the United States, to Members of Congress to simply let the story be told. Let the Able Danger story finally come out to the American people. Let them understand what really happened. Let Scott Philpott talk. Let Tony Shaffer talk. Let the others who have been silenced have a chance to tell their story to Congress and openly to the American people. In the end, the country will be stronger.http://tinyurl.com/djxr6

Back in 1999 and 2000, they did not have a clue. They had millions of dollars, hundreds of millions of dollars, and could not do what a 20-member team did in being able to identify Mohammed Atta before the 9/11 attacks. DIA does not want that to come out, Mr. Speaker. They do not want that to come out. Heaven forbid the Defense Intelligence Agency, with hundreds of millions of dollars, would have a 20-member team do what they could not do because they were using new technology and new software. They do not want that to come out. That is why that Deputy Director, when he was at that meeting, said, I do not want to see this. Do not show it to me. And that is why today that Deputy Director is trying to ruin the career of Lieutenant Colonel Shaffer.

The only way to resolve this, Mr. Speaker, is to have a full independent investigation by the Inspector General of the Pentagon. I have asked Secretary Rumsfeld today to do that. I would ask my colleagues on both sides of the aisle to join me in that request. Let the independent inspector for the Pentagon go in, not DIA. DIA cannot investigate itself. It does not have the capability to do that. It does not have the integrity to do that. Let the Inspector General do the investigation and while that is being done, protect Lieutenant Colonel Shaffer. He does not deserve to have his career ruined or destroyed for telling the truth.

And while we are at it, Mr. Speaker, if DIA is going to continue to press this ridiculous set of facts, then as I said earlier, I want DIA prosecuted for the five felonies they committed in sending classified documents to a person that 2 weeks earlier they said was incapable of receiving classified information. And if this continues, I want DIA held responsible for illegally transferring $500 of public assets to a person, that in the process of sending that stuff to him, DIA committed fraud against the taxpayers. I want them held accountable: DIA's stupidity; DIA's incompetence.

We have a new nominee for the head of DIA, and I am going to ask every Senator to fully explore each of these issues before that person is confirmed. I will meet with every Senator personally and go over all of this information. And I would encourage the Senators and the House Members to interview the other people who worked with Lieutenant Colonel Shaffer and to get their assessments of what is going on there. They will all tell them the same thing: Shaffer is being abused and used as a scapegoat. If they can ruin Shaffer, they can silence the story.

It cannot happen, Mr. Speaker. We cannot let it. That is not what America is about. That is not what we say to our enlisted personnel when they sign up for duty. That is not what we say when we pass our defense bills every year.

This man is being maligned and mistreated. He is being harassed. The most scurrilous accusations, totally unfounded, have been given to the American media; and I will name names, and I will ask for an investigation of the people who made those statements to these media people because it all needs to be put on the record.

And as someone tomorrow who will chair another hearing on our defense oversight to try to get the best value for the dollars for our military, I ask all of our colleagues, Mr. Speaker, on both sides of the aisle to join us. This is not Republicans or Democrats. It is about what is fundamental to this country. I would ask our constituents across America we represent to join us, to express their outrage, to e-mail, make phone calls, write letters to the Secretary of Defense, the President of the United States, to Members of Congress to simply let the story be told. Let the Able Danger story finally come out to the American people. Let them understand what really happened. Let Scott Philpott talk. Let Tony Shaffer talk. Let the others who have been silenced have a chance to tell their story to Congress and openly to the American people. In the end, the country will be stronger.http://tinyurl.com/dfcfa

Weldon certainly gets my vote for "Salesman" of the Year. With a pitch like this, How could anyone in brain-Washing-ton D.C. not buy his product? ;)

By Sher Zieve – Appearing on the Laura Ingraham Radio program Monday, Rep Curt Weldon (R-Il) said that the smear campaign and cover-up is continuing, in regards to Abel Danger Intel. Weldon advised that Lt. Col. Anthony Shaffer, who has a gag-order placed on him by the Pentagon, DIA and DoD, is being summarily vilified by these government agencies.

Weldon said: “This is something I expect from Kim Jong Il of North Korea.”

At least 7 former Able Danger team members have volunteered to testify before Congress that former Clinton Administration officials were warned ahead of time of both the USS Cole bombing and of Mohammed Atta’s presence in the US a year before 9/11/2001. These individuals have also been placed under gag-orders and are not allowed to speak to any Senate Committees or the media.http://tinyurl.com/7nr44

When Rep. Curt Weldon started tugging on the loose string called Able Danger, he expected to find an oversight by the 9/11 Commission. Surely the Commission would regard the identification of Mohamed Atta al-Sayed as an Al Qaeda operative, within the United States, prior to 9/11, as significant and would be eager to clear up the omission.

The Commission has denied that anyone ever told them that Atta or other hijackers were identified by DOD employees prior to 9/11. The Able Danger documents they reviewed, they claim, mention Al Qaeda and show charts, but none of the stuff they saw mentions Atta.

So why has it been so difficult for an investigative commission charged with getting to the truth about the events of 9/11, that has powers of subpoena, had such trouble finding out the Atta revelations when Weldon, who is not on the commission has no problem producing witnesses, including corroborative witnesses, to back up these statements;

ONE

"What I did not know, Mr. Speaker, up until June of this year, was that that secret program called Able Danger actually identified the Brooklyn cell of al Qaeda in January and February of 2000, over 1 year before 9/11 every happened. In addition, I learned that not only did we identify the Brooklyn cell of al Qaeda, but we identified Mohamed Atta as one of the members of that Brooklyn cell along with three other terrorists who were the leadership of the 9/11 attack."

TWO"The Deputy Director of the Defense Intelligence Agency was in a meeting with Lieutenant Colonel Shaffer almost a year before 9/11, and Lieutenant Colonel Shaffer showed him a disk in his office with information about al Qaeda and Mohammed Atta, and the Deputy Director of the Defense Intelligence Agency stopped the briefing and said, you cannot show me that. I do not want to see it. It might contain information I cannot look at.

Now, Tony Shaffer was not in the room alone, Mr. Speaker. There were other people, and we know their names. So we have witnesses. Now, the Deputy Director has denied that meeting and denied he was there and denied this particular story, but the fact is he knows that we are going to pursue it."Full article: http://tinyurl.com/cjufl

Able Danger warned of attack on USS Cole

NORRISTOWN - Senior Pentagon officials were warned not to let the USS Cole dock in Yemen two days before terrorists attacked the ship five years ago killing 17 sailors, according to Congressman Curt Weldon, who said the crucial intelligence was gleaned from the former secret defense operation, "Able Danger."

Weldon, vice chairman of the House Armed Services Committee, revealed the information in a House speech last Wednesday evening that blasted the Defense Intelligence Agency's (DIA) attempts to discredit Army Reserve Lt. Col. Anthony Shaffer, a DIA employee who worked as a liaison with the "Able Danger" team.In June, Shaffer told The Times Herald during an interview on Capitol Hill that the now-defunct data mining operation had linked Sept. 11 hijacker Mohamed Atta to an al-Qaida cell in Brooklyn in 2000 - more than a year before the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks.The military's Special Operations Command ran the high-tech dragnet that searched for terrorist linkages. The terrorist associations were mapped out on large charts, according to Shaffer and other of "Able Danger" colleagues, during the program that operated between 1999 and 2001.However, following Shaffer's attempts to broker an arrangement that would draw the FBI into the operation, the program was shut down.Weldon and Shaffer believe "Able Danger" intelligence may have disrupted - or even prevented - the Sept. 11 attacks if it had continued.In August, Navy Capt. Scott Phillpott and James D. Smith, a defense contractor, corroborated Shaffer's story.On Wednesday, Weldon again criticized the Pentagon for dragging its feet in its probe of the defense program's history, and continued his criticism of the CIA, which he said tried to protect its own intelligence turf from other government intelligence agencies."What we have here, I am convinced of this now, is an aggressive attempt by CIA management to cover up their own shortcomings in not being able to do what the Able Danger team did," he said.Besides claiming to identifying Atta from a grainy photograph prior to Sept. 11, the intelligence team also tried to warn the Pentagon not to allow the USS Cole to make a refueling stop in Yemen five years ago, Weldon said.On Oct. 12, 2000, a small boat loaded with explosives rammed into the side of the USS Cole as the ship refueled in port at Aden, killing the 17 Navy personnel."(Able Danger members) also identified the threat to the USS Cole two weeks before the attack, and two days before the attack were screaming not to let the (ship) come into the harbor at Yemen, because they knew something was going to happen," he said.The "Able Danger" group operated at the Army's former Land Information Warfare Center (LIWA), in Ft. Belvoir, Va. After LIWA's intelligence gathering capability impressed Weldon, he tried to pitch the idea of a collaborative intelligence center to the CIA in 1999, but was rebuffed.Also in his speech, Weldon accused the DIA of trying to smear Shaffer rather than come clean on why "Able Danger" was shut down.Shaffer, who was awarded a Bronze Star for his service in Afghanistan, had his top-secret security clearance suspended in 2004 allegedly because of disputes over travel expenses and phone bills.But his supporters suggest Shaffer is being made a scapegoat for going public with the "Able Danger" revelations in August.Two days before he was set to testify about the program before the Senate Judiciary Committee on Sept. 21, the Reserve officer's secret clearance was revoked, and the Defense Department barred him, Phillpott and Smith from testifying at the hearing.Also in August, Pentagon officials told reporters at a press conference that "Able Danger" data had been deleted from computers. A former Army intelligence officer, Erik Kleinsmith, confirmed this at the Judiciary Committee hearing, testifying he was ordered to destroy information.During the life of the program, the operation's team members created charts linking terrorists. However, during the recent investigation, none have been found.The Pentagon, which claimed it is restricted from retaining intelligence on United States citizens and foreign residents living in the U.S., so-called "U.S. persons," for more than 90 days.Full article: http://tinyurl.com/9kcyn

[excerpt]Congressman Curt Weldon claims a secret Pentagon project known as Able Danger identified Mohammed Atta as a member of a New York-based al Qaeda cell a year before the September 11th terrorist attacks. There was no mention of Able Danger in the commission's report on 9/11. I'm joined now by former Senator Slade Gorton, a member of the 9/11 Commission. Good to have you here, but, in fact was Able Danger omitted from your initial 9/11 Commission report with a purpose?

SLADE GORTON, FORMER 9/11 COMMISSIONER: No, Able Danger was omitted -- omitted from our report because it didn't have anything to do with 9/11. We learned about Able Danger from Colonel Shaffer, who briefed four of our staffers on it in Kabul, Afghanistan eight or nine months before our report came out. We immediately followed up on it, and we got all of the Able Danger materials from the Department of Defense, and they had nothing to do with Mohammed Atta or with any of the other conspirators. So Able Danger was -- got very interesting. It didn't identify Mohammed Atta a year beforehand. Unfortunately, no one identified Mohammed Atta beforehand. Able Danger was simply irrelevant to our report, and still is.

DOBBS: Irrelevant, you say, and at the same time, you're saying that Colonel -- Lieutenant Colonel Terry (sic) Shaffer, Congressman Curt Weldon have their facts entirely wrong. Is that correct?

GORTON: No, not entirely wrong. Colonel Shaffer told us about Able Danger. And he was the first person who did so. He also claimed later that he told us about Mohammed Atta. He didn't do that. We had four people in on that meeting, all of whom were fascinated by Mohammed Atta, who of course at that point we knew to be the leader of the conspirators. He was never mentioned.

Congressman Weldon said he turned over Mohammed Atta's name to Steve -- to Steve -- what's his name -- the deputy head of the National Security Agency in the White House. He didn't do so. He never told us about it. He never told his own congressional investigating committee about it. Never mentioned it until he got to his book about three or four months ago. Unfortunately, he's just mistaken. He may have talked about some of the elements of 9/11, but they didn't include Mohammed Atta.

DOBBS: Congressman Weldon, as you know, has called for an investigation. I take it you feel that that's unnecessary at this point?

GORTON: Oh, no. That investigation has already taken place. It's taken place by the Senate Intelligence Committee. That investigation will report, I hope, within the next week, and it will agree with the 9/11 Commission.

DOBBS: The fact that the intelligence community has not followed up on the recommendations that you and the rest of the commission put forward, and you focus greatly on the FBI. Do you have any sense that there is going to be a movement toward fulfilling the recommendations, the remaining recommendations of the commission?

GORTON: Well, let's divide it. Congress did a very good job in creating a new direction of national intelligence and a National Counterterrorism Center. We had more faith in the FBI I think at the time in which we reported a year ago, because we really liked Bob Mueller and what he was trying to do. But he's being defeated by the FBI itself, which just won't change its culture to provide the kind of activity on internal security here in the United States that we think is necessary. We're very troubled by that.

DOBBS: Senator Slade Gorton, we thank you for being here as we continue to follow this story and to follow the recommendations that are followed and not followed by the administration. We thank you for being here.

CNN transcript, near bottom of this page: http://tinyurl.com/d9nhj

said ...Note to 'my e-pping Tom', I posted another link, quick, better add it to your diary.

House Armed Services Chairman Duncan Hunter (R-Calif.) has asked the Pentagon’s inspector general to investigate why the Defense Intelligence Agency (DIA) revoked the top security clearance of a whistle-blower involved in a classified intelligence cell that may have identified the Sept. 11 terrorists a year before the attacks.

Army Reserve Lt. Col. Anthony Shaffer, who has said that a military unit called Able Danger identified four Sept. 11 hijackers before the 2001 attacks, is facing Pentagon accusations that he broke military rules.

None of the charges — which range from misuse of government property to flashing military identification while intoxicated — are related to his claims about Able Danger. His clearance, however, was revoked a day before he was supposed to testify in front of the Senate Judiciary Committee on the intelligence cell’s findings.

Hunter’s request for an independent investigation into why Shaffer’s clearance was revoked is the latest development in a larger battle that Rep. Curt Weldon (R-Pa.), vice chairman of the House Armed Services Committee, has been waging against the DIA for months. Weldon has accused the agency of trying to put a lid on the information the intelligence unit uncovered.

Weldon says that the DIA stifled crucial information about Mohammed Atta, who became the lead Sept. 11 terrorist, and then destroyed related documents. He also says that the Sept. 11 commission appointed to look into the attacks turned disregarded information it received from Able Danger members.

Weldon has said he learned that a secret program known as Able Danger was put in place in 1999 and 2000 by the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff and by the general in charge of the Special Forces Command. It was devoted to uncovering key cells of al Qaeda globally, giving the military the capability to destroy those cells.

Weldon told The Hill that he believes the DIA, a unit of the Pentagon, is carrying out a smear campaign against an officer who spoke the truth.Full article: http://tinyurl.com/dsm2g

Able Danger, China and DIA 10/21/05After Curt Weldon’s blistering attack on the DIA and tried to find out who was deputy director during those years. While I have not found that information (yet) I did find out a few things.

First off, the DIA Deputy Director position is a civilian position and possibly an appointee - and that would make him/her a Clinton appointee. Recall it was DoD General Counsel lawyers who were tipped to Able Danger and came down hard, causing the purge of data in ealry 2000.

I believe the current Deputy Director is Mark Ewing who I can trace back to March 2001 (do a find on ‘ewing’). Whether Ewing is a Clinton era holdover and the source of the problem is pertinent to the Weldon claims.

Before that I have determine Jeremy Clark was the DD for DIA - and I can trace him until 1999 (do a find on ‘jeremy’). Interestingly enough, Jeremy Clark was somewhat involved in the issue of technology transfer to China during this same period - though he appears to have been aligned against the Clinton administration’s efforts to relax the restrictions:

Leitner submitted statistics showing a decline under the Clinton administration of export cases referred by the DTSA for further review by the Defense Intelligence Agency and the National Security Agency. In closed testimony last week, DIA Deputy Director Jeremy Clark told the House Intelligence Committee he was worried about the decreasing number of export cases being referred to his agency for review, according to a congressional aide who spoke on condition of anonymity.Full article: http://tinyurl.com/ccjsa

Louis Freeh/Able Danger - Transcript of Meet The Press InterviewAs I note in my previous post, Louis Freeh was on Meet The Press with Tim Russert this morning. The Intelligence Summit has a video clip of the interview. During this interview, Mr. Freeh offers some comments concerning Able Danger. Here is a transcript of Mr. Freeh's Able Danger remarks (beginning 16 minutes and 15 seconds into the interview):

Louis Freeh: No I disagree with that. And you know, while we're on the subject of the 9-11 Commission, I'm very interested and I know the country is in the Able Danger report. We have now very honorable military officers telling the United States, Tim, that in 2000 not only had Mohammad Atta been identified, by photo and name, but was earmarked as an Al Qaeda operative in the United States. Apparently this information was brought to the 9-11 Commission prior to their report, but there's no reference to it. That's the kind of tactical intelligence that would make a difference in stopping the hijacking, not the strategic intelligence, the stuff that comes out of um, like water out of a fire hydrant and then in hindsight, you say, well you missed these three molecules of water. I think we're very interested in what the 9-11 Commission didn't do with respect to Able Danger.From: http://tinyurl.com/7dflp

Wow, Fable Deranger 'reporting' is soon to bloom into a its own cottage industry. Anybody want to venture a guess as to who might produce the first 'documentary' "exposing" the truth about Fable Deranger for the alternative media? ;)

ZAID: Well, I think the first thing is that someone should remind Senator Gorton he's no longer talking on the Senate floor where he has immunity from defamation, because he's going perilously close to crossing the line with his attacks on Tony Shaffer who, by the way, is -- his statements are being supported by half a dozen or so more career civil servants within the military and the defense contracting community.

So it's just nonsense with his statements that, in fact, he's talking about things he just doesn't know, and that's the problem.

He doesn't know because the Defense Department never gave the 9/11 Commission the crucial information.

DOBBS: Never gave them the information.

Dr. Eileen Pricer (ph), Captain Scott Philpott, both DOD, and J.D. Smith (ph), a defense contractor -- did any of those individuals who support your client, Colonel Shaffer -- have any of them made any progress in communicating with the 9/11 Commission, with the government here?

ZAID: Well, Shaffer spoke to them in October of '03, as the senator said, and then they asked the DOD for more information. When the DOD -- what we didn't know at the time was that the Defense Department had destroyed millions and millions of the documents that the Able Danger team had come up with, so it's no surprise that the commission then didn't have the information.

Then, Scott Philpott goes to them in July of '04, only about a week or so before the committee's report was issued, so it was too late to do anything.

Where the senator fails to address is the issue that if the commission had gone back to Shaffer in January of '04, when he tried not once but twice to talk to them and said one sentence, "Mr. Shaffer, we're not finding any documents that support your claims. Can you point us in the direction we should go?"

If they had done that, Shaffer could have gone back to his office at DIA and obtained the info.

And J.D. Smith, my other client, actually had a copy of the chart -- the chart that everyone is looking for -- with Mohamed Atta's name and photo, had it hanging in his wall. That chart then was destroyed several months later, and the DIA destroyed Shaffer's documents.

DOBBS: I'm unclear about who would take a picture, a chart off a wall for an active DOD project without their permission or knowledge?

ZAID: No.

By this time, Able Danger actually had ceased by late 2000, early 2001.

And the copy of the chart that J.D. Smith had was a draft copy that he had just kept as a memento. And when he moved his offices, the paper the chart was on was so frail it just fell apart and was destroyed. That didn't happen until the summer of 2004.

If the commission had actually followed up and done its due diligence, the chart would exist today in their hands and what Senator Gorton says was irrelevant probably would have been featured prominently in their report.

DOBBS: As another member of the commission, Tim Roemer, has said on this broadcast, he never saw the chart, no one has ever been able to produce the chart, he would have loved to have seen the chart.

ZAID: Absolutely.

And I can tell you also that Senator Gorton is not necessarily speaking for the entire 9/11 Commission.

I know of meetings with at least one commission member -- and it's not who you just referenced -- who does not agree with what Senator Gorton is saying.

DOBBS: Well, let's find out, what is the next step here? Because Congressman Curt Weldon, who is doing an outstanding job of advocacy for truth here and trying to get to the truth, and Senator Specter holing hearings on the Judiciary Committee on this very issue -- what happens next? How do we get to the truth?

ZAID: Yes.

And the Defense Department has been blocking the Senate Judiciary from pursuing their investigation. I had to testify in the place of my clients because DOD wouldn't allow it.

We're hopeful that somewhere within the grand canyon of the government and in the defense contractors that additional information, and especially the documents, someone will find some copies.

We do know that there is at least another person coming forward soon who will say the same assertion that Shaffer and Philpott and Price and the others have been.

So what's their motive? What exactly did these people have to gain by lying? Even the Defense Department says that they're credible witnesses, but unfortunately there is no documents. But we know in this town, just because there's no documents -- hey, 18 minutes off the Nixon tape disappeared. Do we think there wasn't anything on those 18 minutes? We just have to find it.

DOBBS: Mark Zaid, we thank you for being here representing Colonel Anthony Shaffer. We will continue along with you to try to get to the bottom as best we can of this remarkable controversy on able danger...

ZAID: Thank you.

DOBBS: And who knew what a year before 9/11.

Congressman Curt Weldon as we just mentioned, leading an investigation being and a remarkable advocate for both your clients and for the truth here. Thank you.

Near the bottom of this page: http://tinyurl.com/c7xs2

Hmmm, trillions missing from the Pentagon pre-9/11 and they are supposedly doing charts about terrorists on 'Tissue' paper. This 'Reality T.V.' series gets funnier with each episode. Tune in next week to learn how the pens that Shaffer 'stole' were eventually used to fill out the hijackers visa applications.

September 10, 2001By THE ASSOCIATED PRESSRep. Curt Weldon, R-Pa., indicated Monday he would seek $6 billion more to make emergency improvements to bases and equipment and to purchase urgently needed spare parts. Weldon recently toured 20 bases over four days to call attention to the problems. The service chiefs have said they face more than $30 billion in unfunded needs.

Within hours of the attacks on the Pentagon and the World Trade Center, politicians and missile experts were arguing over whether successive administrations have allocated sufficient resources to counterterrorism, and whether the money has been well spent. Some Democrats took aim at the Bush administration for what they called its preoccupation with missile defense at a time when the country is facing more immediate threats from conventional terrorism.

"We need to devote much more attention to conventional threats," said Rep. Earl Blumenauer (D-Ore.), a sponsor of legislation designed to strengthen security in the nation's transportation networks, including airports. "Our resources are finite, as is our attention span. We have more urgent priorities" than missile defense.

Rep. Curt Weldon (R-Pa.), a leading proponent of missile defense and increased Pentagon budgets, rejected that view. "It is not either-or," he said. "We need to do both. . . . Our number one priority, according to the Constitution, is to provide for the common defense of the American people."

PRESS CONFERENCE ON ABLE DANGER; NEW INFO EXPOSES MORE BLUNDERS BEFORE 9-11 & POINTS TO WIDER COVER-UP

WASHINGTON, Nov 8 - U.S. Rep. Curt Weldon (R-Pa.), vice chairman of the House Armed Services and Homeland Security Committees, will hold a press conference on Wednesday, November 9th at 12:30 p.m. in the House Radio/TV Gallery to discuss the latest findings from his investigation into Able Danger.The latest findings include: information Able Danger provided to defense officials about terrorist activity in the Port of Aden prior to the terrorist attack on the USS Cole back in October 2000; a discovery of another Able Danger member who confirms a set of Able Danger data not accounted for by the Pentagon; recent statements by the 9-11 Commission about Able Danger; and the latest efforts by the Defense Intelligence Agency (DIA) to smear Able Danger member Lt. Col. Shaffer who broke the silence about the Pentagon’s efforts to track al-Qaeda worldwide prior to September 11._________________________________WHAT: Press Conference with Congressman Curt Weldon on Able DangerWHERE: House Radio/TV Gallery, The Capitol (H-321)WHEN: Wednesday, 9 November 2005 at 12:30 p.m.CONTACT: John G. Tomaszewski, (202) 225-2011

**Print media who do not have credentials may obtain a day pass at the House Print Gallery in H-315.http://tinyurl.com/ag762

Weldon press conference video

rtsp://video.c-span.org/15days/e110905_weldon.rm

Pentagon probes treatment of 'Able Danger' officer

By David Morgan

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The Pentagon inspector general is investigating the Defense Intelligence Agency's treatment of an Army colonel who was the first to claim publicly that the government knew about four September 11 hijackers long before the 2001 attacks, officials said on Wednesday.

Among the issues under review is whether the DIA revoked the security clearance of Lt. Col. Anthony Shaffer last September in retaliation for repeated comments he made in the media about a military intelligence team code-named Able Danger, sources familiar with the case said.

Revelations about Able Danger, a small data-mining operation that ended in 2000, have reignited debate about whether the United States could have prevented the attacks on New York and Washington that killed 3,000 people and prompted the U.S. war on terrorism.

Pentagon spokesman Bryan Whitman said the inspector general began reviewing Shaffer's case after Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld received a written request on October 20 from Rep. Duncan Hunter of California, Republican chairman of the House of Representatives Committee on Armed Services.

Shaffer and his attorney met with officials from the inspector general's office on Wednesday.

Shaffer came forward in August with claims that Able Danger had identified September 11 ringleader Mohamed Atta and three other hijackers as al Qaeda members in early 2000. But he said Pentagon lawyers prevented the team from warning the FBI.

Others associated with Able Danger, including the team's former leader, Navy Capt. Scott Phillpott, have since made similar statements. But an exhaustive Pentagon search of tens of thousands of documents and electronic files related to the operation failed to corroborate the claims.Full 2 page article: http://tinyurl.com/8uxhz

(note to my epping tom, quick run home and tell daddy that i made another post about Fable Deranger)[ Edited Thu Nov 10 2005, 05:08AM ]

While we are not certain of Representative Weldon's motives, he does manage to keep the "Able Danger" story in the news. In this interview with CNN's Lou Dobbs, Weldon asserts that intelligence from the "Able Danger" group could have prevented the bombing of the USS Cole and the attacks that took place on September 11, 2001.

Weldon was also quoted in an article published earlier today by Eric Rosenberg of Hearst Newspapers:said ...Citing information provided to him by Navy Capt. Scott Philpott, the former manager of the Able Danger project, Rep. Curt Weldon, R-Pa., said that two weeks before the Oct. 12, 2000, attack - and then again two days before - the intelligence unit uncovered evidence of a plot against an unnamed U.S. target in Yemen.

"They saw information that led them to unequivocally understand that something was going to happen in the port at Yemen involving an American entity," said Weldon, vice chairman of the House Armed Services Committee.

"Two days before the attack, they were jumping up and down because they knew something was going to happen ... at the port of Aden," Weldon told a Capitol Hill news conference.

[size=12]In light of the fact that Able Danger uncovered a terrorist cell in Brooklyn this might be interesting:Atta and Al Shehhi at Helmsley Hotelhttp://www.team8plus.org/forum_viewtopic.php?6.1765#1765[/Size]

...Able Danger is still presented as a "limited hangouter" in mainstream media, now also reinforced by former 9/11 panelists Roemer and Gorton.The mindgames around this false-hope "finding" for the official plotline continue....

"...There is no documentary evidence that Able Danger identified Mohamed Atta as an al Qaeda operative before 9/11. The 9/11 Commission found no such evidence. The Department of Defense has found no such evidence in its internal review. The Senate Select Committee on Intelligence is now conducting its own investigation of Able Danger. We look forward to its findings, and any new facts it may uncover..."[ Edited Mon Nov 21 2005, 05:41PM ]

The Army Reserve officer who went public with details about a secret military unit called Able Danger is being fired from his post at the Defense Intelligence Agency, a move that also could end his military career.

Attorney Mark Zaid, representing Lt. Col. Tony Shaffer, was informed last week that the agency rejected an Oct. 19 appeal of its decision to revoke his client's top-secret security clearance.

The rejection came nearly two years after Shaffer said he first told the Sept. 11 commission that Able Danger identified four of the Sept. 11 hijackers, including ringleader Mohamed Atta, as terrorists more than a year before the attacks.

Zaid said he cannot prove the action was based on Shaffer's conversations with the commission, but he said the speed of the agency's decision "denotes selective attention."

Without the clearance, Shaffer cannot perform his duties as a senior intelligence officer.

"I expect that Tony will receive a notice of termination also in record-breaking speed," Zaid said in an e-mail.

Shaffer, a 43-year-old native of Kansas City, Mo., began speaking to the media in August after the Sept. 11 commission said Atta had not been identified before the attacks. He has been on paid administrative leave since March 2004, when the Defense Intelligence Agency began looking into allegations he had broken rules.

The allegations against Shaffer ranged from making false statements and circumventing his chain of command to obtaining a medal under false pretenses.

On Tuesday, Shaffer called the allegations "bogus," noting that the Army promoted him to lieutenant colonel in October 2004.

That promotion would not have occurred, he said, if the Army had concerns with his job performance or personal integrity.

But now, due to the finality of the agency's action, the Army might have little choice but to follow suit, thereby undercutting his uniformed career, Shaffer said.

Shaffer, however, is not without supporters in high places.

U.S. Rep. Duncan Hunter, R-Calif., and chairman of the House Armed Services Committee, last month asked Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld to put any further action against Shaffer on hold until the Pentagon inspector general could review the agency's handling of the case.

Two of Shaffer's former supervisors have backed Shaffer. In separate statements, retired Army Maj. Gen. Robert Harding and retired Army Col. Gerry York called Shaffer a model employee and an "outstanding" officer.

Figure ExposedEver wonder how much the United States spends every year on intelligence operations?

It's a closely guarded secret, but at a recent conference in San Antonio, a senior government employee told the audience the figure was $44 billion.

The comments made by Mary Margaret Graham, deputy director of national intelligence for collection, were first reported by U.S. News & World Report, which had sent a correspondent to cover the conference.

Details about intelligence spending are classified. Intelligence officials have argued that releasing the figures could damage national security.

But Steve Aftergood, a research analyst at the Federation of American Scientists in Washington, has said there is no harm in disclosing the aggregate amount.

"Anyone who pretends that national security is jeopardized by the release of this figure is a fool," Aftergood said.

THE ONGOING CONTROVERSY over the Able Danger project deepened this week when two more sources from the U.S. Army data-mining project came forward. Navy Captain Scott Phillpott and civilian contractor James Smith joined Lt. Col. Anthony Shaffer in claiming that Able Danger identified Mohammed Atta and three other 9/11 hijackers as potential al Qaeda operatives well before the attacks. Phillpott specifically told the New York Times when he went public that Able Danger made that connection between January and February of 2000, 19 months before the attack.

However, that puts the Able Danger scenario in conflict, again, with the 9/11 Commission's final report--this time on the Atta travel timeline. On pages 167-168 of the report, the Commission provides a narrative of the Hamburg cell movements during this period:

After leaving Afghanistan, the four began researching flight schools and aviation training. In early January 2000, Ali Abdul Aziz Ali--a nephew of KSM living in the UAE who would become an important facilitator in the plot--used Shehhi's credit card to order a Boeing 747-400 flight simulator program and a Boeing 767 flight deck video, together with attendant literature; Ali had all these items shipped to his employer's address. Jarrah soon decided that the schools in Germany were not acceptable and that he would have to learn to fly in the United States. Binalshibh also researched flight schools in Europe, and in the Netherlands he met a flight school director who recommended flight schools in the United States because they were less expensive and required shorter training periods.

In March 2000, Atta emailed 31 different U.S. flight schools on behalf of a small group of men from various Arab countries studying in Germany who, while lacking prior training, were interested in learning to fly in the United States. Atta requested information about the cost of the training, potential financing, and accommodations.

The Able Danger team has insisted it made the identification of Atta while he lived inside the United States, however. This created the problem that kept them from coordinating with the FBI when their analysis pointed out this potential terrorist cell. Had they identified Atta and his cohorts while in Hamburg, Able Danger could easily have notified the State Department of their suspicions and kept cell members from getting visas.

IF ATTA HAD ALREADY MADE IT to the United States, how did the Commission establish this timeline? They deduced it from FBI interrogations of three sources: Khalid Sheikh Mohammed and Ramzi Binalshibh, two of the plotters who helped create the 9/11 attacks, and Mohammed's nephew Ali Abdul Aziz Ali. The footnotes in the Report to the Atta timeline paragraphs give almost no corroborative evidence besides that of the testimony of these men--who have little motivation to cooperate honestly with American investigators.

Could the "intelligence" gleaned from the interrogations of these al Qaeda plotters and high-level terrorists have been an attempt at disinformation?

SO WITH THESE FACTS BEHIND US, let us move to some informed speculation. Recall the strange and unremarked coincidence of the arrests of two Iraqi intelligence agents in Germany at the end of February 2001. These arrests never made it into the Commission's final report, despite the fact that German authorities described an elaborate Iraqi network involving several German cities at the same time that three of the four 9/11 team leaders all traveled to or through Germany. One of these team leaders, Ziad Jarrah, left Germany just as the Germans captured the Iraqi spies.

The only media reports about these arrests came immediately afterwards, brief dispatches from the BBC and Reuters. Two weeks later, however, a Parisian Arabic newspaper, Al-Watan al-Arabi, published a more detailed analysis of the capture on March 16:

Al-Watan al-Arabi (Paris) reports that two Iraqis were arrested in Germany, charged with spying for Baghdad. The arrests came in the wake of reports that Iraq was reorganizing the external branches of its intelligence service and that it had drawn up a plan to strike at US interests around the world through a network of alliances with extremist fundamentalist parties.

The most serious report contained information that Iraq and Osama bin Ladin were working together. German authorities were surprised by the arrest of the two Iraqi agents and the discovery of Iraqi intelligence activities in several German cities. German authorities, acting on CIA recommendations, had been focused on monitoring the activities of Islamic groups linked to bin Ladin. They discovered the two Iraqi agents by chance and uncovered what they considered to be serious indications of cooperation between Iraq and bin Ladin. The matter was considered so important that a special team of CIA and FBI agents was sent to Germany to interrogate the two Iraqi spies. [emphasis added]

Despite this contemporaneous report about the nature of the German arrests and the involvement of American counterintelligence officials in the investigation, not a word of the affair appears in the Commission's final report.

WHICH BRINGS US to the hotly debated reports of Atta's alleged visit to Prague on

April 9, 2001. Czech intelligence had kept a close eye on Iraqi envoy Ahmed Khalil Ibrahim Samir al-Ani ever since an Iraq defector told British intelligence in 1998 about a plot to blow up the Radio Free Europe station in Prague in retaliation for its broadcasts into Iraq. The Czechs eventually stripped al-Ani of his diplomatic credentials and sent him back to Saddam Hussein.

However, after 9/11, Czech intelligence privately told the United States that it had evidence that al-Ani met with Mohammed Atta on April 9, 2001. Later, the Czechs went public with the information--and to this day, the Czechs insistently stand behind this intelligence. Part of the reason for this insistence is not just a belief in their source, but also a corroborating entry in al-Ani's datebook, which the Czechs apparently discovered during a surreptitious search of the Iraqi embassy after Saddam's fall in April 2003. The datebook contained an entry for an April 2001 meeting with a "Hamburg student," the same description used by Atta himself when applying for his visa. (It is perhaps worth noting that Epstein is the only person to have reported on the existence of this daybook.)

However, the 9/11 Commission disregarded the Czech intelligence and declared that Atta had never gone to Prague in April 2001. How did the Commission reach this conclusion? Their report details the factors that went into this rejection on pages 228-9:

* Atta's cell phone was used in the U.S. on April 6, 9, 10, and 11

* No U.S. records of Atta traveling under his own name

* No pictures of anyone who looked like Atta in the Czech Republic on those dates

WE HAVE BEEN TOLD REPEATEDLY that the 9/11 Commission Report debunks the Prague trip, but the report says only that it "cannot absolutely rule out the possibility that Atta was in Prague on April 9, 2001. He could have used an alias to travel and a passport under that alias, but this would be an exception to his practice of using his true name while traveling (as he did in January and would in July when he took his next overseas trip). The FBI and CIA have uncovered no evidence that Atta held any fraudulent passports."

The Commission's source for this? Ramzi Binalshibh.

Why did the Commission put so much emphasis on the testimony of two terrorists while dismissing the testimony of two senior American officers in determining the timeline for Mohammed Atta and the Hamburg cell?

Edward Morrissey is a contributing writer to The Daily Standard and a contributor to the blog Captain's Quarters.

"...I haven’t seen Congressman Weldon’s letter yet, but...we need to pursue the truth about 9/11 wherever it leads. The truth should be the only priority. And we need the truth. My main focus now, though, is to end the war in Iraq...."

btw, Boxer voted for the Patriot Act and the 2002 Iraq War resolution.

NOTE that Jonathan Gold, the admin of bbsucks, a close friend of Kyle Hence (who registered 911truth.org) is glorifying this as a 'breakthrough'.

Once again, supporters of 911truth.org are deceptive with false hope campaigns and reinforcing the official plotline.[ Edited Sat Dec 10 2005, 11:38AM ]

Re: "Able Danger" vs. Curt Weldon- Propaganda Hoax or Truth?John Doe II, Fri Jan 13 2006, 02:37AMWhat I believe is the most interesting part of Able Danger:At the beginning of 2000 Able Danger had identified the Brooklyn cell including Atta and the alleged hijackers Al Shehhi, Al Mihdhar and Nawaf Al Hazmi. The problem is: Atta and Al Shehhi officially hadn't even entered the US and were still in Marienstrasse (Hamburg) which was under observation by at least the BND and the CIA. Al Mihdhar and Nawaf Al Hazmi were indeed already in the US but in California.To me this is the really tough question people should push.

In September 2000, one year before the Al Qaeda attacks of 9/11, a U.S. Army military intelligence program, known as “Able Danger,” identified a terrorist cell based in Brooklyn, NY, one of whose members was 9/11 ringleader Mohammed Atta, and recommended to their military superiors that the FBI be called in to “take out that cell,” according to Rep. Curt Weldon, a longtime Republican congressman from Pennsylvania who is currently vice chairman of both the House Homeland Security and House Armed Services Committees.

The recommendation to bring down that New York City cell -- in which two other Al Qaeda terrorists were also active -- was not pursued during the weeks leading up to the 2000 presidential election, said Weldon. That’s because Mohammed Atta possessed a “green card” at the time and Defense Department lawyers did not want to recommend that the FBI go after someone holding a green card, Weldon told his House colleagues last June 27 during a little-noticed speech, known as a “special order,” which he delivered on the House floor.

Details of the origins and efforts of Able Danger were corroborated in a telephone interview by GSN with a former defense intelligence officer who said he worked closely with that program. That intelligence officer, who spoke to GSN while sitting in Rep. Weldon’s Capitol Hill office, requested anonymity for fear that his current efforts to help re-start a similar intelligence-gathering operation might be hampered if his identity becomes known.Article: http://tinyurl.com/7p95p

NEW YORK (CNN) -- Attorneys for al Qaeda conspirator Zacarias Moussaoui have subpoenaed Pennsylvania Congressman Curt Weldon to testify at a trial that will determine whether Moussaoui should be executed.

The defense is seeking Weldon's testimony to try and show that the government knew more about the September 11, 2001, attacks than Moussaoui did...

"...You'll recall that, when I wrote my Gadflyer article, Rep. Curt Weldon's office claimed that he didn't speak at the coronation of Sun Myung Moon. First his secretary said, "I'm telling you, he didn't go." So I sent her some links. She then said Weldon planned to attend this awards show, but couldn't make it due to his schedule. ..."

Is Kirk Lippold, commander of the ill-fated USS Cole, the latest career military officer to be victimized by the political miasma now surrounding the controversial Able Danger intelligence program?

Lippold was in charge of the Cole on October 12, 2000 when the guided missile destroyer was attacked in the harbor of Aden, Yemen by Osama bin Laden's al-Qaeda terrorist organization. Suicide bombers Ibrahim al-Thawr and Abdullah al-Misawa approached the port side of the Cole in a small craft laden with explosives and blew a 40-by-40-foot gash in the destroyer's port side. Seventeen sailors were killed and 39 others were wounded in the blast.

The official Navy Judge Advocate General Manual (JAGMAN) investigation of the incident that Lippold "acted reasonably in adjusting his force protection posture based on his assessment of the situation that presented itself" when the Cole arrived in Aden to refuel. The investigation further concluded that "the commanding officer of Cole did not have the specific intelligence, focused training, appropriate equipment or on-scene security support to effectively prevent or deter such a determined, preplanned assault on his ship."

Although Lippold lacked "the specific intelligence" to prevent the attack on the Cole, his superiors did not.

Analysts associated with the secretive Able Danger program, including Army Reserve Lieutenant Colonel Anthony Shaffer and Navy Captain Scott Phillpott, who say they identified Mohamed Atta and three other 9/11 hijackers a year before the Al Qaeda-connected terror attacks on America, also say their team passed on warnings about Al Qaeda activity in Aden before the attack on the Cole to high officials at both Special Operations Command (SOCOM) and Central Command (CENTCOM).

Shaffer, Phillpott and others tried unsuccessfully to bring the Able Danger information to the attention of the FBI and later to the 9/11 Commission. But when a frustrated Shaffer eventually went public with the findings, he was placed on administrative leave from his post at the Defense Intelligence Agency, had his security clearance lifted, was repeatedly and falsely vilified as an alcoholic, philandering kleptomaniac by his superiors at the Defense Department, and was effectively muzzled from speaking further either to reporters or to Congress.

The Able Danger team had uncovered evidence of five 'hot spots' of Al Qaeda activity: Mauritania; Malaysia; Hamburg, Germany; Brooklyn, New York; and Aden, Yemen. Captain Phillpott even briefed then-SOCOM head General Peter Schoomaker (now Chief of Staff, U.S. Army) on the findings just two days prior to the attack on the Cole. Phillpott reportedly warned Schoomaker that Able Danger had uncovered information of increased al-Qaeda "activity" in Aden harbor -- a warning that was gleaned through a search of bin Laden's business ties.

Able Danger analysts also passed along the information to the brass at CENTCOM, who had authority over the Fifth Fleet to which the Cole was assigned, but inexplicably took no action to head off the attack on the Cole. Rep. Curt Weldon (R-Pennsylvania), who has been leading the push inside Congress to get to the bottom of the Able Danger affair, later told Fox News: "[T]wo weeks before the attack on the Cole, in fact, two days before the attack on the Cole, [Able Danger] saw an increase of activity that led them to say to the senior leadership in the Pentagon at that time, in the Clinton administration, there's something going to happen in Yemen and we better be on high alert, but it was discounted."Full article :http://tinyurl.com/c6fkz

Cole attack planner escapes prison(AP)Updated: 2006-02-06 08:41

An al-Qaida operative sentenced to death for plotting the USS Cole bombing that killed 17 sailors in 2000 was among a group of convicts who escaped from a Yemen prison last week, Interpol said Sunday in issuing a global security alert.

Officials set up checkpoints around the capital of San'a, where the prison was located, to try to catch the escapees before they could flee to the protection of mountain tribes, according to a Yemeni security official speaking on condition of anonymity because he was not authorized to talk to the press.

Some mountainous tribal areas are essentially outside the control of Yemen's central government, raising fears the fugitives could hide there before escaping the country.

The Yemeni government made no official comment Sunday.

Yemeni officials said Jamal al-Badawi — a man convicted of plotting, preparing and helping carry out the Cole bombing — was among the fugitives, Interpol said. Al-Badawi was among those sentenced to death in September 2004 for plotting the attack, in which two suicide bombers blew up an explosives-laden boat next to the destroyer as it refueled in the Yemeni port of Aden on Oct. 12, 2000.---Behind bars in his courtroom jail cell, Jamal al-Badawi listens to the appeal court proceedings, in San'a, Yemen, in this Dec. 8, 2004 file photo. Al-Badawi, considered to be a mastermind of the USS Cole bombing that killed 17 sailors in a Yemeni port in 2000 was among a group of convicts who escaped from a Yemen prison last week, Interpol said Sunday, Feb. 5, 2006, in an 'urgent global security alert. [AP]---Full article: http://tinyurl.com/dkt9w

Alleged terrorist's trial moves ahead

By Matthew Barakat and Michael J. SniffenASSOCIATED PRESS

ALEXANDRIA, Va. - More than four years ago, Zacarias Moussaoui was arrested by the FBI while taking pilot training in Minnesota.

He was still in custody when al-Qaida hijackers attacked on Sept. 11, 2001.

After a tortuous trip through the legal system, the 37-year-old Frenchman admitted last April that Osama bin Laden ordered him to train to fly a jetliner into the White House.

He pleaded guilty to conspiring with the Sept. 11 hijackers but claimed not to know their plans.

On Monday, a federal court begins picking a jury to decide whether Moussaoui, the only person charged by the United States in the nation's most deadly terrorist attack, will be executed or spend life in prison.

Whatever the jury decides, Moussaoui's impact has been both unexpected and peculiar:

• Once thought to be a missing 20th hijacker, he generated only a false alarm: The nation's 3,500 crop-dusters were temporarily grounded based partly on what FBI agents found on his computer. But Moussaoui is no longer believed to be a 20th hijacker, and the government deleted references to his interest in crop-dusters from its indictment.

• His case was central to the finger pointing, investigations and reforms that followed the attacks. An obscure FBI lawyer in Minneapolis made the cover of Time magazine as a person of the year for her whistleblowing complaint that the bureau dropped the ball in investigating Moussaoui.

• One of the nation's most efficient federal courthouses, proud to be nicknamed the "Rocket Docket," has been slowed to a crawl by a defendant with no legal training serving largely as his own lawyer.

The pace picks up Monday when 500 potential jurors show up at the courthouse in Alexandria to fill out detailed questionnaires about their knowledge of the case and feelings about the death penalty.

Opening statements in the sentencing trial are set for March 6, and the trial is expected to last one to three months.

Prosecutors contend Moussaoui could have prevented the Sept. 11 attack by telling investigators what he knew when arrested.

The defense argues that Moussaoui knew less about Sept. 11 than the government, citing investigations that turned up multiple missed opportunities to possibly prevent the attacks.

Those investigations were fueled in part by FBI agent Coleen Rowley's public complaint that the FBI failed to aggressively investigate Moussaoui after his August 2001 arrest.

Selected as a Time Person of the Year in 2002, Rowley is now running for Congress.

The defense has subpoenaed Rep. Curt Weldon, R-Pa., the House Armed Services Committee vice chairman, who in a House speech on pre-Sept. 11 intelligence failures revealed that a secret military data-mining operation code-named Able Danger had identified four of the 19 hijackers, including leader Mohammed Atta, as al-Qaida operatives a year and half before the attacks.---The plea included an admission that Moussaoui "knew of al-Qaida's plans to fly airplanes into prominent buildings in the United States and he agreed to travel to the United States to participate in the plan."

Moussaoui insisted he was not involved with Sept. 11 but was training for a later attack on the White House.---Full article: http://tinyurl.com/b8fzj

Trying to upstage the likes of Samuel Byck & Frank Corder , no doubt.

This One, They Didn't Let InWASHINGTON, June 6, 2002

(CBS) Law enforcement officials say the government kept hijacking ringleader Mohammed Atta's roommate from entering the United States on at least four occasions but didn't track his money transfers that led directly to the eventual hijackers.

Officials say Ramzi Bin al-Shibh - named in court papers as an unindicted hijacking co-conspirator and the focus of a worldwide manhunt - intended to join the hijackers on their mission but shifted to providing logistical support when he couldn't get into the country.

The Yemen citizen was refused a U.S. visa four times in 2000 because of suspicions he wouldn't leave America if he was let in.

The officials, commenting on condition of anonymity, say FBI money tracking experts have reconstructed wire transfers Bin al-Shibh made from Germany and Yemen - some made using an alias - that went to the eventual hijackers and to one of the flight schools where they trained.

The officials say two of those transfers went last summer to Zacarias Moussaoui, the man U.S. officials believe was chosen to replace Bin al-Shibh as a hijacker but who was foiled when he was arrested at a Minnesota flight school last August.

Moussaoui is the lone defendant charged with conspiring with Osama bin Laden, Bin al-Shibh and the hijackers in the Sept. 11 attacks. Prosecutors are seeking the death penalty against him.

This isn't the first time Bin al-Shibh's name has come up in the investigation. In testimony before Congress last February, Dennis Lormel, the chief of the FBI's financial crimes section, said that Bin al-Shibh, Atta and Marwin Al-Shehhi - another Sept. 11 hijacker - were members of an al Qaeda terrorist cell based in Germany.

Lormel pointed to wire transfers from Bin al-Shibh to Moussaoui as evidence contributing to Moussaoui's indictment. Bin al-Shibh was also identified at that time as one of five men appearing in a video found in Afghanistan and released by the Department of Justice earlier this year, allegedly showing a discussion of preparations for the commission of terrorist acts.---# According to court records and interviews, Bin al-Shibh:

# Wired money July 26, 2000, from Germany to al-Shehhi in Florida, where he was attending flight school.

# Arranged Aug. 14, 2000, to wire money from his account in Germany to the account of a Florida flight training school where Jarrah attempted to enroll Bin al-Shibh for pilot lessons.

# Received on July 30 and 31, 2001, two wire transfers from the United Arab Emirates in the amount of $15,000 and then on Aug. 1 and Aug. 3 wired $14,000 in money orders to Moussaoui in Oklahoma. For these transactions, Bin al-Shibh used an alias, Ahad Sabet, according to U.S. officials---Full article: http://tinyurl.com/a8696

TARRAGONA, Spain -- On the morning of July 9, 2001, Mohamed Atta drove a silver Hyundai rental car east out of Madrid toward this Mediterranean beach area, a ribbon of resorts crowded with vacationers. The attacks on New York and the Pentagon were just weeks away and Atta was headed to a secret meeting to complete the planning, according to U.S. officials and a Spanish police investigation of the lead hijacker's movements.

As Atta drove 300 miles across the country, his old roommate in Germany, Ramzi Binalshibh, was boarding a budget flight from Hamburg to Reus, the small airport that serves this region. For Binalshibh, a Yemeni whose repeated failures to get a U.S. visa had ended his ambition to join Atta in death in the United States, the meeting in Tarragona would crown a mission that began for him at a similar summit 18 months earlier in the Malaysian capital of Kuala Lumpur, U.S. law enforcement and Western intelligence officials said. ---"It was only by luck, really, he wasn't given a visa," said one official. "Otherwise, he'd have been on one of those planes that went down."---Full article: http://tinyurl.com/c2hsc

This boils down to some very "coincidental timing", it would appear that Fable Deranger "discovered" terrorist's planning attacks in early 2000. The information gathered is never used to prevent any of these attacks, but the program is getting plenty of mileage promoting the hijacker meme.

These very same 'terrorists' then start flight training to be able to "act out" the storyline of a T.V. show that was filmed at nearly the same time that Fable Danger first discovered them three months earlier.

The "EComCon" company from the pilot episode is an acronym for Emergency Communications and Control, which is from "Seven Days in May".

Tagline: "I'm suggesting Mr President, there's a military plot to take over the Government of these United States, next Sunday..."---They also feared that Air Force One itself was a target. Cheney told the president there was a credible threat against the plane. Using the code name for Air Force One, Mr. Bush told an aide, “Angel is next.” The threat was passed to presidential pilot Col. Mark Tillman.---From: http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2002/09/11/60II/main521718.shtml

An active-duty military intelligence analyst has told congressional investigators that 9/11 pilot Mohamed Atta surfaced 13 times in a controversial Pentagon computer program before he executed the attacks, The Post has learned...

During a Capitol Hill news conference, Rep. Curt Weldon, R-Pa., said the unit _ code-named "Able Danger" _ also identified "a problem" in Yemen two weeks before the attack on the USS Cole. It knew the problem was tied into the port of Aden and involved a U.S. platform, but the ship commander was not made aware of it, Weldon said.

The suicide bombing of the Cole killed 17 sailors on Oct. 12, 2000.

If anyone had told the Cole's commander that there was any indication of a problem in Aden, "he would not have gone there," Weldon told reporters. "He had no clue."

Weldon would not say who provided evidence of such intelligence to him.

Since August, Weldon, vice chairman of the House Armed Services Committee, has pushed Congress and the Pentagon to investigate the workings of Able Danger, which used data mining to identify links that might indicate the workings of terrorists. If he is correct, it would change the timeline for when government officials first became aware of Atta's links to al-Qaida.

Former members of the Sept. 11 commission have dismissed Weldon's findings.

Cmdr. Greg Hicks, a Pentagon spokesman, released a statement saying that Pentagon officials welcome the opportunity to address these issues during a hearing scheduled Wednesday before a subcommittee of the House Armed Services Committee.

Final evidence, that Curt Weldon is a limited hangouter and not credible, just pushing the 9/11 "plotline" and official myth on war on terror and 'al-quaeda':

Shaffer's written testimonyWednesday, February 15, 2006http://www.abledangerblog.com/2006/02/shaffers-written-testimony-is-must.html

http://www.house.gov/hasc/schedules/2-15-06ShafferTestimony.pdf

"...If we are to win this war on terrorism, and hope to preclude the next 9-11 type attack - an attack that many experts fear wil be one that utilizes a weapon of mass destruction such as chemical, biological or nuclear - it is my judgment that we must examine and make sure that the bureaucratic and policy problems that hobbled ABLE DANGER effort have been fixed.

From my experience, to date, the problems have not been fixed as the officers and culture that existed before 9-11, and permitted the ABLE DANGER project to fail, are still in place today..."

-another final thought on new mass mails regarding the latest development of the 'able danger' hearings, meanwhile also merged into the Zacarias Moussaoui trial, since Curt Weldon, a Sun Myung Moon associate, http://www.iapprovethismessiah.com/2004/06/weldon-khadafy-and-moongate.html was invited to testify over there.

Unsurprisingly the biggest political diversions from physical and investigative evidence on the "9/11 Inside Job", are strongly tied together:

Able Danger and Sibel Edmonds. Mark Zaid of the Washington law firm Krieger and Zaid, not only represents Sibel Edmonds, but also Lt. Col. Anthony Shaffer, one of the Pentagon analysts who has come forward to support Curt Weldon's so called 'Able Danger's findings'.

Krieger and Zaid is a front within a front, representing CIA or other Intelligence Officers, who occasionally "sue" the CIA, NSA, FBI, DIA and other US agencies.

There was Jeffrey Sterling, an attorney employed by the CIA from 1993-2001, who hired Krieger & Zaid, PLLC and represented him in 2 lawsuits.

They also represented Arianna Huffington (against the CIA and U.S. Department of Justice, 1998), Mohamed Al Fayed (the owner of "Harrods"), Notra Trulock, Congressman Lane Evans, American Lawyer Media and families of the Victims of Pan Am Flight 103. http://www.fas.org/irp/news/2003/03/sterling030403.html

What speaks for them are their efforts to represent military personnel refusing anthrax vaccine, since 1998 (!).http://www.gulfwarvets.com/court3.htmPossibly this proves a diversion within intelligence- and military apparatus of the U.S, also often labelled by many bloggers as the "red vs. blue team" fight.

Krieger & Zaid also support the James Madison Project, yet another CIA front, specialized in absurde unclassification lawsuits, f.i. to uncover the "Detection of German Secret Ink" (1917) and other similar cases.

http://www.jamesmadisonproject.org/boardofdirectors.htmlOne of the board members is Patrick G. Eddington, an award-winning analyst at the CIA's National Photographic Interpretation Center for almost nine years. He also was coordinating the CIA's military targeting support to NATO during Operation Deliberate Force in Bosnia in 1995.

Able Danger and the PR around alleged whistleblower Sibel Edmonds is a psyOP front, deceiving leftgatekeepers and 9/11 'truth' activists into a false hope- and distraction campaign, which in reality reinforces the official story of 9/11 plus the myth about the bogus war on terror and the bogus and phantom group al-quaeda.

Sibel Edmons, promoting herself as victimized and under "gag order" is also under the influence of limited hangouter and military insider Daniel Ellsberg, who served in the Pentagon in 1964 under Secretary of Defense Robert McNamara.

In 1970 he leaked some secretive "Pentagon Papers" to The New York Times, allegedly revealing some unknown mysteries of the Nixon administration. In reality Ellsbergh was victim of a setup with limited information.

After "hiding" for years, he publicly surrendered, but strangely all charges against Ellsberg were eventually dropped.

His motives why he ignores extreme evidence of the US orchestration of the 9/11 attacks, remain obscure and not credible.

Ellsberg was or still is an employee of the Rand Corp., who supports the official story of 9/11 and manipulated both 9/11 commission and NIST since their first public hearings of blocking any further investigations, instead "looking forward" and "correct negligence" of the past.[ Edited Wed Feb 15 2006, 06:18PM ]

The danger of Able Danger - at least for those who enjoy believing everything they are told - is that it completely undermines the whole basis for the Official Story of what happened on September 11, 2001. It's a timing thing.

The FBI has been very careful to have Atta arriving for the first time in the United States in June 2000. Their simple reason for the certainty of arrival time is that he is documented to have been attending school in Hamburg up to May 2000.

Able Danger puts Atta in the United States, as head of a Brooklyn cell of terrorists, at least as early as January or February 2000, and probably back into 1999.

There have been more recent attempts to obfuscate the issue by claiming that the information, including the picture of Atta, came from surveillance overseas, or claiming that Atta's participation in the Brooklyn cell was in September 2000 (impossible, as Atta was otherwise engaged by that time; also note this 'usually reliable source' making a fool of himself carrying the water for the Pentagon spinners), but the original information is clear that the data mining with respect to Atta was with respect to his American activities at least as early as early 2000.

Therefore, the terrorist Atta can't be the same guy as the student in Hamburg. However, the entire story of September 11 is constructed on that identity. The biography of the Egyptian Atta, how he became radicalized attending a mosque in Hamburg, formed part of the al Qaeda terrorist cell in Hamburg, and then came to America to lead a terrorist attack, depends on the American 'Atta' being the same guy as the Egyptian/Hamburg Atta (by 'Atta', I mean the guy who assumed the Atta identity for his operations in the United States).

Able Danger confirms that they are not the same guy, and that we really know nothing about the background of the American 'Atta'.

Since we can now see that the FBI story with respect to Atta is a lie, and we have no way of knowing anything about who he really was or what motivated him, we can see that the stories about every other one of the nineteen is similarly flawed.

If the FBI can lie about Atta, they can lie about all of them. Suddenly, the connection between al Qaeda and September 11, which depended entirely on the connections to the Hamburg radical Muslim cell, disappears...

[JURIST] A lawyer representing Zacarias Moussaoui [JURIST news archive] said Tuesday he would seek to compel the testimony of US Rep. Curt Weldon (R-PA) [official website], recently subpoenaed [CNN report] by the defense as a witness to the extent of the government's knowledge of the identities of 9/11 hijackers before the terrorist attacks...

Though 911truth.org board member Nic Levis apparently reacts to some criticism by pointing out, that the 'Able Danger stories have the character of a "limited hangout", he actually reinforces the limited hangout and myth of an alleged hijacker 'job' by himself:

http://www.911truth.org/article.php?story=20060302155139342March 2, 2006".... That doesn't rule out theories that Atta and Co. were being set up as the patsies for an "inside job."...

On the "mystery woman", which team8plus member John Doe II will possibly pick up again in his currently very popular "alleged suspects folder":http://www.team8plus.org/forum_viewforum.php?23

"...In the latest news, blog reporter Rory O'Connor (Mar 1, archived below) says a Pentagon inspector general's investigation has identified the person who provided Able Danger with Atta's name and photo. The photo was incorporated into Able Danger's organizational chart of alleged al Qaeda activities in the United States...

...The source of the photo, O'Connor now writes, is "a female contract employee of defense contractor Orion Scientific," nowadays a data-mining subsidiary of SRA with heavy Homeland Security involvements. This would appear to confirm an earlier assertion by Orion employee James D. Smith, who had also worked with Able Danger, "that Mr. Atta's name and photograph were obtained [in 2000] through a private researcher in California who was paid to gather the information from contacts in the Middle East." Since that story was already in the New York Times of Aug. 23, 2005, we wonder why it should take until now for a Pentagon inspector-general to "identify" someone who was working for the Pentagon in the first place.http://summeroftruth.org/atta2.html#times82305

O'Connor does not name his source for the story, but his blog makes clear that he is in contact with Rep. Curt Weldon..."(Source: http://www.roryoconnor.org/blog/index.php?p=162#comments )

NOTE: Rory O’Connor is president and co-founder of the international media firm Globalvision and also oversees two Internet sites, the not-for-profit MediaChannel.org, and the Globalvision News Network.

http://www.roryoconnor.org/blog/index.php?p=20

MediaChannel is also run by Danny Schecter, a well known leftgatekeeper, who is opposing "conspiracy theories about 9/11" and supports the official story about 9/11 and its limited hangout character.[ Edited Thu Mar 02 2006, 05:19PM ]

The only thing that stinks worse than my vegetable bin is the latest attempt to spin away the Able Danger claim. For those of you who do not recall, Able Danger was the name of the Pentagon "data mining" unit which identified Mohammed Atta as a potential terrorist threat -- and even had his picture up on a flow chart -- well before 9/11. In fact, the team had placed Atta in the United States at a time when he was, according to the official chronology, in Germany.

That claim made Able Danger dangerous -- especially for Homeland Security head honcho Michael Chertoff. We'll get to that part of the story soon.

As long-time readers may recall, there was a period when I expressed some doubt about these allegations. They were first aired by a loose-cannon GOP congressman named Curt Weldon, whom the intelligence community obviously views as a useful idiot. If you are a military intelligence officer and you want to spread some alarming declaration (true or otherwise) about a proposed enemy du jour, simply schedule a "private" meeting with Weldon. Impressed by rank and tickled to be "on the inside," he'll rush to the nearest microphone.

The great virtue of such a tactic is that if a fake story falls apart -- or if a true story proves embarrassing and needs to be reeled back in -- all blame will go to Weldon. Not to his informants.

And that, apparently, is what's going on right now. The media tells us that the Able Danger tale has unraveled -- and sure enough, Curt Weldon finds himself on the business end of many an accusatory finger. It's all his fault.---Why? Because James D. Smith, referenced above, also reported that Atta's name emerged during an examination of individuals connected to Omar Abdul Rahman, the "blind sheik" who helped mastermind the first World Trade Center bombing. That allegation sent the G.O.P. flacks into a spin-frenzy; for a while, they floated a "two Attas" theory. This absurd panic reaction occurred because Michael Chertoff, in private practice, represented one Magdy El-Amir, a New Jersey businessman long believed to have funded both Rahman and Al Qaida.--

Rep. Curt Weldon, who broke the Able Danger story last year revealing thatmilitary intelligence had identified lead hijacker Mohamed Atta as aterrorist threat before the 9/11 attacks, now says that Osama bin Laden hasdied.

Weldon made the stunning claim during an interview Wednesday with thePhiladelphia Inquirer, which reported: "Weldon is making explosive newallegations. He says a high-level source has told him that terrorist leaderOsama bin Laden has died in Iran, where he has been in hiding."

Weldon cited as his source an Iranian exile code-named Ali, telling thepaper: "Ali's told me that Osama bin Laden is dead. He died in Iran.

Weldon said he last spoke to Ali three weeks ago. The Iranian exile was aprominent source for his 2005 book, "Countdown to Terror." ..."

My view on Able Danger - a scripted, fictional story drafted to support planned new strategies, any comments are welcome ;)

Problem: Military Intelligence is restrained by legal restrictions in the domestic gathering of intelligence and in the possibilities to share this intelligence with civilian law enforcement agencies and intelligence organisations

Reaction: Fictional Able Danger Story to create a popular justification for the new strategy in the media and public opinion

Restraints are lifted, larger role for the Pentagon in domestic intelligence gathering, expanded possibilities to share information with civilian organisations, (partial) lifting of Posse Comitatus legislation

The Able Danger story was launched around the moment the US Administration released it's plans for an expanded domestic role for military intelligence services and increased cooperation between these service and civilian agencies (June 2005).

The story seemlessly fitted the strategy - if military intelligence had been allowed to gather domestic intelligence, and had been given the permission to share this intelligence with law enforcement agencies there would have been a chance that the 9/11 plot was unraveled before it happened and it could possibly have been prevented.

An excellent justification for the planned strategy.

Also, it is used in combination with the Northcom role in the Katrina disaster response to justify the (partial) lifting of Posse Comitatus (the legal constraints on domestic role of the Pentagon) ?

See my earlier posting in this thread for details on this strategy, and the larger Quadrennial Defense Review defense plans of the Pentagon :

Political Backgrounds of the Able Danger storyhttp://www.team8plus.org/forum_viewtopic.php?6.800.40

In an earlier postings in this thread, an explanation was given about the supposed improved Able Danger program, "Able Providence" - it's all about domestic MI capabilities and cooperation with civilian law enforcement :

Able Providence, as the new program has been dubbed, would establish “robust open-source harvesting capabilities” to give military and law enforcement agencies the information to take the initiative in the war on terrorism—that is, to be able to plan and execute offensive measures—in addition to continued defensive actions.

I think this is a revival of past programs which enable MI to spy on the anti-war movement and other opponents, and to be able to use the gathered intelligence in court against these persons (wasn't this an issue in the Church Commission investigation in the seventies, as domestic intelligence was gathered on the anti-war movement and civil rights organisations in the Vietnam-war era, the Counter Intelligence Program or Cointelpro?).

"The existence of Able Danger, and its purported early identification of the 9/11 terrorists, was FIRST DISCLOSED publicly on June 19, 2005 in an article 'Missed chance on way to 9/11' by KEITH PHUCAS (kphucas @timesherald.com ), a reporter for The TIMES HERALD, a Norristown, Pennsylvania daily newspaper."

The head of Mr. Phucas on a platter:

Keith Phucas Letter http://www.danielpipes.org/comments/3833

Even Academics Should See That Ousting Saddam Husseinis a Moral Imperative

Reader comment on article: Profs Who Hate America

Submitted by Keith Phucas, Nov 13, 2002 at 01:22

The antiwar protests seem like deja vu to me, except that now I'm on the other side of the argument.

I grew up in the 1960s and opposed the Vietnam War. I still feel it was the wrong policy. When I started college in 1972, the U.S. was still in Vietnam, and Pres. Nixon was demonized.

Now I'm for a war against the Iraqi regime, and for the first time in my life, I'm supporting a Republican president.

To me, any military action to oust Saddam Hussein would be a highly just cause. This Stalinist dictator has terrorized Iraqis for much too long. And bydefying the U.N. sanctions repeatedly, he deserves to be dealt with aggressively. This view should transcend liberal or conservative politics. In fact, Congress passed the Iraqi Liberation Act during Clinton's administration. The longer we put off dealing decisively with Hussein, the worse we look.

Is antiwar sentiment really the majority view on campuses today? Or, do a few outspoken professors makeit SEEM as if most professors are against a militaryaction in Iraq?

It seems like the left is trying hard to reinvigorateitself, but to me the antiwar effort comes off ashopelessly lame. I would almost expect shortsightedprotests from college sophmores but not from theirprofessors.

Keith PhucasThe Times HeraldNorristown, Pa.

Note: Opinions expressed in comments are those of the authors alone and not necessarily those of Daniel Pipes....

"No doubt, high technology will continue to play a keyrole in the nation's security and its new war." -Keith Phucashttp://tinyurl.com/mxbd8 (zwire.com)High spiesKEITH PHUCAS, Times Herald Staff 10/01/2001

[Back in June, Edward Reese sat in his Lockheed Martin office in King of Prussia reminiscing in broad terms about how his pioneering work on a large computer system for a classified satellite program had helped keep the Soviet Union in check during the Cold War.

In order to keep the nation safe from the Soviet threat, it had been crucial for the United States government to keep an eye on Russia's fighting capability from space. The U.S. intelligence agencies had to stay a step ahead of the U.S.'s communist nemesis.

"You don't want to be surprised," Reese said. "You don't want another Pearl Harbor." Little did he know how prophetic his remarks would become a few months later.

On Sept. 11, the terrorist hijackings of four commercial jet airliners - since dubbed this generation's Pearl Harbor - destroyed the World Trade Center towers in New York City, heavily damaged the Pentagon outside Washington and killed more than 6,000 people at last count...

...Looking back, the Cold War engineers, along with thousands of their GE colleagues, associate defense contractors and government counterparts, had fought a long, bloodless war not with big guns, but with long hours, teamwork, extraordinary technical ingenuity and business acumen.

"We won the Cold War with technology," Gispan said.

Just as the attack on Pearl Harbor tested America's resolve on Dec. 7, 1941, the new war to eradicate America's terrorist enemies will compel a shockednation to find more effective ways to defend its homeland.

No doubt, high technology will continue to play a key role in the nation's security and its new war...

The background of Times Herald-how Robert M. Jelenic and JRC (Journal Register Company) took over

Alex Constantine wrote:

"...Journal Register Co, owns the Norristown paper that Keith Phucas works for, w/ CEO Robert Jelenic, brought in by the investment firm of Warburg Pincus to run the ailing newspaper chain..."

...i furthermore found this:7 months after the first attack on the Twin Towers (February 26, 1993)the takeover of independent papers began...

http://www.ajr.org/Article.asp?id=3246AJR, May 1999Continuation of The Selling Of Small-town America

...Kathy Morris, controller at the Times Herald in Norristown, Pennsylvania, from 1993 to 1996, recalls the time Jelenic demanded a monthly bottom-line figure by 8:30 p.m. on a Friday night--two days early...

...While Journal Register may have merely chipped away at some papers, the Times Herald in Norristown, a suburb of Philadelphia, got the ax. On JRC's first day at the helm, September 27, 1993--still known there as "takeover day"--the company fired 25 employees...

http://www.journalregister.com/press/010306.html

Journal Register Company is a leading U.S. newspaper publishing company. Journal RegisterCompany owns 27 daily newspapers, including the New Haven Register, Connecticutâ€™s secondlargest daily and Sunday newspaper, and 338 non-daily publications...

CEO/Chairman of the Board/Director atJournal Register CoTrenton, New Jersey

ROBERT M. JELENIC is Chairman and Chief Executive Officer of the Company. Mr. Jelenic was President and Chief Executive Officer from the inception of the Company to June 2005 and has been Chairman of theCompany since 1997. Mr. Jelenic has also been a director of the Company and its predecessors for over ten years. A Chartered Accountant, Mr. Jelenic began his business career with Arthur Andersen in Toronto, Canada.

Mr. Jelenic has 29 years of senior management experience in the newspaper industry, including 12 years with the Toronto Sun Publishing Corp.

"Live free or die," the state slogan of New Hampshire, should be contemplated by everyone at least once a year... there are some in this country who would have us stand by while others live oppressed lives much as our forefathers did before they decided enough was enough.

We shouldn't be in Iraq, they whine. They don't want us there. Really? Eleven million out of the 15 million registered voters who turned out to take part in the democratic process would lead me to believe otherwise.... There is a conservative voice in the media and you have it right here in your newspaper. I will continue to fight the good fight for our readersand will assure all of you that all media is not sitting on the left side of the aisle. ... I think we should shut off our borders to illegal immigrants. Notbecause I don't like people from foreign countries, but because I don't like supporting people who don't pay their fair share in taxes.... Stan Huskey is the editor of The Times Herald. He can be reached at 610-272-2500 ext. 215 -----------Here, a source catches Huskey lying in print ...

http://pbagosy.livejournal.com/tag/media

Tuesday, August 23rd, 2005

Rethug editor puts words in my mouth and doesn't even credit me.

Stan Huskey, right wing-nut and editor of theTimes-Herald (to which I subscribe), has responded to my letter (here), but was too pussy to print it in its entirety, or even mention me by name. In fact, most of his column was his email response to me spliced in with my original letter.

"However, a gentleman from Norristown took the conversation just a step or two further when he attempted to explained to me the differences betweenDemocrats and Republicans. In doing so, he inadvertently pointed out that there are a great many similarities."

I wouldn't have though he was talking about me until he quotes me at the end of the next paragraph. I, neither intentionally nor unintentionally pointed out similarities between Republicans and Democrats. In fact, I didn't even mention Democrats....